Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

On February 4, 2012, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim D’s office located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, stating that “The Defendant would have the victim obtain a loan of KRW 10.4 billion by adjusting the victim’s real estate owned by him/her at an objective appraisal price of KRW 12 billion by 14 billion.”

However, the defendant had no intention or ability to obtain a loan of 10.4 billion won to the victim by raising the appraisal of the property owned by the victim.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received from the victim the total sum of KRW 5 million on the same day, and KRW 20 million on February 15, 2012, and acquired it by deception.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness D;

1. Some statements of each prosecutor's protocol of examination of the defendant against the defendant;

1. Statement by the police of E (including each part of the F and G statements);

1. According to the evidence presented in the table of trust documents (Evidence No. 31) and the financial advisory agreement, it is recognized that the defendant could receive an appraisal of 14 billion won through a person who is in the financial field of the victim on the background of the career in which the real estate development consulting company was operated for a multi-year basis, and that the defendant could receive an appraisal of 14 billion won through a person who is in the financial field of the victim, and that the victim could have a big difference from the actual appraisal value and tried to devise several methods after receiving the money from the victim, and eventually failed to receive the said appraisal. Thus, the criminal facts of the judgment, including the defendant's fraud, are sufficiently recognized.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the provisional payment order is the background and content of the instant crime, the degree of damage.