1. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for eight months;

2. Acquittal of each fraud listed in the separate sheet among the facts charged in the instant case

Punishment of the crime

On January 18, 2008, the defendant assumes the position of the chairman of the Busan Metropolitan City General Advisory Committee, and jointly purchases E apartment buildings through a certified intermediary who knows money to the injured party C (23 tax and name before name: D) on or around January 18, 208.

“The meaning of “.......”

However, even if the defendant received money from the injured party, he did not have the intention or ability to jointly purchase the E apartment.

Nevertheless, the Defendant made such a false statement to the victim, and he received 1.5 million won from the victim to the Defendant’s bank account in Korea.

Summary of Evidence

1. The legal statement of the witness C;

2. Statement made by each prosecutor and police with regard to C;

3. A complaint;

4. Application of the police investigation reporting Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 347 of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act selection of punishment;

2. Determination of the Defendant’s and defense counsel’s assertion regarding the alternative imprisonment sentence

1. The summary of the argument is not that the defendant deceivings the victim as stated in the facts constituting the crime, and he did not have any intent to commit such crime.

2. Determination

A. The degree of the formation of a conviction in a criminal trial must be such that there is no reasonable doubt as to the extent of excluding any possible doubt, but the rejection by causing a suspicion of having probative value without a reasonable ground shall not be allowed as exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence. The reasonable doubt here refers to a reasonable doubt as to the probability of a fact that is inconsistent with the facts that is not compatible with the facts that are necessary in accordance with logical and empirical rules, rather than including any question and faith, and it cannot be said that a suspicion based on conceptually doubtful or abstract possibility is included in a rational doubt (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Do1048, Jan. 27, 201).