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

Punishment of the crime

On January 2012, the Defendant: (a) purchased a halog golf vehicle to the victim C in advance; (b) made a phone call to the victim on February 2012; and (c) made a call to the victim that “this good vehicle is good in a foreign country; (d) if it is not decided as soon as possible, another person purchases it; and (e) the vehicle should be promptly purchased in a foreign country; and (e) changed the price of the vehicle in advance.

However, in fact, from around 2010, the Defendant was unable to pay the bank obligations, and the Defendant thought that the vehicle price would be consumed for personal purposes, and thus there was no intention or ability to purchase the said vehicle even if the Defendant received the vehicle price from the victim.

As above, the Defendant: (a) on March 3, 2012, KRW 8 million from the victim under the name of the vehicle price; and (b) the same month;

8. A delivery was made of KRW 5 million, KRW 5 million on the 14th of the same month, and KRW 23 million on the 15th of the same month.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. C’s legal statement;

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

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. A written complaint filed by C;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a complainant, a copy of a bankbook, an investigation report (Submission of suspect data), an investigation report (verification of details of transactions in a suspect's account), an investigation report ( Results of execution of a search and seizure warrant), a criminal investigation report (verification of credit rating A), or a criminal investigation report

1. Determination as to the assertion by the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Code of the relevant criminal facts

1. The alleged defendant requested the purchase of golf vehicles with the full amount of KRW 23 million received from the victim E, and the defendant failed to comply with the request. Thus, the defendant did not have intention to commit fraud.

2. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by each evidence prior to the determination, the above assertion is without merit, since it is acknowledged that the defendant had an intention to commit fraud.

(1)