Defendant shall be punished by a fine of four million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

On June 2014, the Defendant, at the depository of the F (State), operated jointly by the victim D and E in the Seocho-gun C of Gangwon-gun on the early 2014, would sell the fertilizers to the victim, who supplied it to the farmer to operate a fertilizer agency in the domestic permanent residence, and then receive a fertilizer receipt from the farmers.

F (State) will submit a fertilizer receipt to the Agricultural Cooperatives to settle the fertilizer price, and the portion of the fertilizer price for which a fertilizer receipt is not received from a farmer will be settled in cash.

“A false statement” was made.

However, in fact, the defendant had no intention or ability to pay fertilizers to the victim even if he was supplied with fertilizers from the injured party because the defendant had been able to sell fertilizers to the farmer and to use the fertilizers for the defendant's personal debt repayment and the payment of fines.

On June 6, 2014, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim; (b) received 24,515,000 won in total from the victim; (c) supplied 20kg 140 g 140 g 140 g 20 g 960 g g 2060 g g 200 g g 2060 g g 200 g g 1460 g g 200 g g 7 times from the victim; and (d) obtained the supply of fertilizers in total by November 6, 201

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Part concerning D in the protocol concerning the interrogation of the suspect against the defendant

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Application of statutes on business registration certificates, detailed statements of transactions (acquisition and inspection), current status of delivery of winding agencies;

1. Relevant Article 347 of the Criminal Act and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act and the selection of fines for the crime;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The amount obtained by deceiving the reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is reasonable, and has not been agreed with the victim until now.

Defendant has been punished for the same kind of crime of fraud in the past.

However, the defendant's mistake.