A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and four months.

The defendant pays 200 million won to the applicant by fraud.

Punishment of the crime

[criminal records] On August 14, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of ten months for fraud at the Seoul Eastern District Court (hereinafter “Seoul Eastern District Court”) and the said judgment became final and conclusive on December 19, 2014. On April 26, 2017, the Defendant was sentenced to five months of imprisonment with prison labor for the same crime in the same court, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on September 1, 2017.

[2] The Defendant of the 2017 Highest 1554, on August 2014, 2014, issued a guarantee to the victim D with the right to remove and transplant the apartment at a coffee shop near the Seocho-gu Seoul, Seocho-gu, Seocho-gu, Seoul. The Defendant of the 2017 Highest 1554 (Seoul Highest 200 million won).

If the project is conducted, it may pay a strict profit.

When the inaugural general meeting of a member is completed at the end of 2014, the deposit amount of 200 million won may be refunded immediately.

The phrase “ makes a false statement.”

However, the defendant had no intention or ability to receive E's removal and transplant business, and was thought to be used for other purposes, such as personal debt repayment, which is irrelevant to the business in receipt of money from the injured party.

The Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 100,000,000 from the victim on August 22, 2014, and KRW 27,100,000,000 from the account under the name of F (State).

The defendant of "2017 Highest 3183" plans the victim I to see the officetel in the H hotel located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government G around October 2013.

In the existing construction works, there is money of KRW 15 million as an executor. It is necessary to KRW 15 million and KRW 6 million as entertainment expenses for banks and city events.

The right of construction of an officetel will be granted at the face of the money.

“A false statement” was made.

However, at the time of fact, there was no fact that the construction of an officetel located in the Donggdong-si Magdong-si Office was being carried out, and even if the defendant was paid money from the injured party, he was planned to use it as debt repayment and living expenses.