A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

Punishment of the crime

On April 26, 2007, the defendant was sentenced by the Jeonju District Court to a suspended sentence of ten months of imprisonment for a crime of fraud, and the judgment became final and conclusive on December 15, 2007.

Even if the defendant received money from the victim C, he/she did not have any intention or ability to arrange to receive a subcontract for construction work.

Nevertheless, on June 11, 2004, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The above victim is well aware of the G of the F and Hanjin Group, which is implemented by H construction and Hanjin Construction Co., Ltd. awarded a contract by the H construction and Hanjin Construction Co., Ltd.” to the effect that “The Defendant would be able to accept a subcontract with the F and Hanjin Group.”

The Defendant, as above, was transferred KRW 17,50,000 from the victim to the agricultural bank account of the J on June 11, 2004 by deceiving the above victim, and received KRW 135,30,000 from the Si to November 6, 2004 in total 21 times as shown in the list of crimes committed in the attached Table, as well as from the Si to November 6, 2004.

Summary of Evidence

1. Entry of the defendant in part of the evidence of the second trial record;

1. Statement made by C of a witness in the fifth trial record;

1. Statement made by K witness in the seventh trial records;

1. Partial statement of the suspect interrogation protocol of the accused by the prosecution (including the C’s statement);

1. The police statement of K;

1. A complaint;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning criminal records and investigation reports (written judgments and copies of summary orders);

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 347 of the choice of punishment (generally, choice of imprisonment);

1. The defendant's assertion of the latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Code concerning concurrent crimes is true that he/she received money from the victim. However, the defendant asserts that it is not the same as the facts charged, but it is not guilty since he/she received money from the victim as the investment money for aggregate extraction business, which

Modern, Modern.