A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the fraud regarding E shall be acquitted. This judgment is among the judgment.

Punishment of the crime

"2018 Highest 4979"

1. On July 17, 2009, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim B that “WY 350 ZM 23 million won will be purchased in the “G store” located in the Busan Annual Zone F, Busan. The Defendant purchased the victim B with the “WY 3.5 million ZM 23 million won.”

However, in fact, the defendant was thought to use money from the victim for personal purposes, such as living expenses, and there was no intention or ability to purchase the vehicle to the victim.

The Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, received total of KRW 3 million on the same day from the victim to the post office account under the name of H for vehicle payment, and received total of KRW 23 million on four occasions, such as remittance of KRW 10 million on the same day, KRW 27.1 million on the same month, KRW 5 million on the 29.5 million on the same month, and KRW 3 million on the 30.5 million on the same month.

2. On July 30, 2009, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim, “I will complete payment after this mold if I will lend one million won to the victim, who is urgently needed to pay money.”

However, the defendant did not have the intent or ability to repay to the victim after lending money from the victim for consumption of living expenses, etc.

The Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, received KRW 1 million from the victim to the City Bank Account in the name of the Defendant on the same day under the name of the victim.

"2019 Highest 112"

1. On September 5, 2009, the Defendant connected to the “J” of the Defendant’s Gabs “W” and sent a notice to the Defendant “to purchase a vehicle in the 2007-type doping Nos. 12 million won.” On contact with the victim K, the Defendant sent the vehicle to the 2007-type doping No. 1650,000 won. On the down payment, the Defendant sent the vehicle to the 1.6.5 million won, the Defendant made a false statement to deliver the vehicle after the completion of repair.

However, the defendant was thought to use the down payment even if he receives the down payment from the victim, and there was no intention or ability to sell the vehicle to the victim because he did not have the vehicle at the time.

The Defendant is identical to this.