A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

Around April 6, 2010, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant would pay the victim c, if it is urgently required to pay the money,” at an insurance company office located in Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government B.

However, in fact, the defendant was in a state of excess of his/her obligation and the income was required to be used for the repayment of the existing obligation, so even if he/she borrowed money from the victim, he/she did not have an intention or ability

The Defendant received 300,000,000 won from the victim to the company bank account in the name of the Defendant as the same day, and received a total of 11,077,520 won from around that time to May 26, 2012 by the above method as indicated in the list of crimes in the attached list of crimes, as shown above.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. C’s legal statement;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes responding to requests for cooperation in investigations, such as a petition for accusation, content certificate, statement of transactions of deposits, investigation report (to hear statements by a complainant), investigation report (to hear statements by a complainantd phone), investigation report (to report the results of execution of a written request for financial transaction information), details of each account transaction, etc.;

1. Relevant Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is that the defendant does not make any effort to recover damage while denying the instant crime by doping the relationship with the victim, his economic difficulties, etc., and there is considerable room to deem that the defendant committed a deceptive act intentionally and constitutes a living-type crime, and that only the defendant has the criminal records of fines.