beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
around April 5, 2017, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “C” restaurant located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government “C” will be granted the right to sell the redevelopment projects in Gyeonggi-do E, so it is expected that the victim D will be granted the right to sell the facility in lots, so it is possible to grant the right to sell the facility in lots.”
However, in fact, F and G, the Defendant’s seat, only requested F and G to change the above sales agency, and there was no possibility that the Defendant would be granted the sales agency due to the lack of the agreement with the partnership, the executor or the contractor, or the contractor on the sales, and even if receiving the above money, there was no authority to dispose of the sales agency, and thus, there was no intention or ability to grant the victim the sales agency authority.
The Defendant received KRW 303,280,000,000 from the victim around April 12, 2017, in total, from around September 24, 2017, from that time, from around 303,280,000, as shown in the list of crimes in attached Table, from around September 24, 2017.
Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.
"2019 Highest 5365"
1. Around December 2017, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim H that “The Defendant would wish to purchase an officetel building in Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-gu, ASEAN, but would lend KRW 70 million to use it as the sale price, and would pay the commercial building as the profit that would be received by selling it.”
However, in the absence of related authorization and permission, the above officetel commercial building did not have a plan to purchase the above officetel, and even if the defendant received KRW 70 million from the victim, he thought that he did not use the money as the price for the sale of the above officetel commercial building and used it for the defendant's personal debt, so there was no intention or ability to pay the victim's money with the proceeds of the sale of the commercial building as stated by the victim.