A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

However, the execution of the sentence shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, while working as an insurance solicitor on January 2010, became aware of the Victim E who had operated the “D pharmacy” (hereinafter “D pharmacy”) of the Hanam-si Building 403, and received KRW 20 million from the victim on November 2009 under the pretext of investment in the business, which was carried out on board a ship at early time, and returned KRW 24 million.

1. Around January 18, 2010, the Defendant, at around January 18, 2010, recommended the victim “DB’s “DB” to make investments that would be able to obtain high profits if it invests in the DB debentures,” and called the victim on or around January 18, 2010, and made a call to the victim to obtain high profits if it invests in the DB debentures. In short, the Defendant would have made an investment that would have been able to receive a minimum of KRW 58 million due to the occurrence of approximately 17% profit if it invests in six months, and would have made an investment that would have a minimum of KRW 58 million.”

However, even if the defendant receives money from the victim as investment money, he was thought to be used for the personal purpose of the defendant, and he did not have the intent or ability to invest in the company bonds, etc.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, as seen above, received 50 million won from the victim to the new bank account (F) in the name of the Defendant under the name of the Defendant as the investment money from the victim and acquired it by fraud.

2. Around April 5, 2010, the Defendant made a call to the victim on or around April 5, 2010 to suggest that “The Defendant shall make an investment in KRW 20 million in order to guarantee high profits if he/she makes a re-investment in the internal ship.”

However, even if the defendant receives money from the victim for the purpose of investment, he did not have the intent or ability to make an investment with the defendant's will to use it for his personal purpose.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, as seen above, received a false statement from the victim to the said new bank account under the pretext of investment, and acquired it by fraud.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the Police Statements of E: 1.