A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

On September 13, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment with prison labor in Busan District Court for fraud, etc., and the judgment became final and conclusive on September 21, 2012.

Around October 2006, the Defendant: (a) around October 2006, the Defendant: (b) concluded that “E operates a company that is operated by the victim C,” through the electric secretary D of the company that is operated by the victim C, and (c) was developing the new apartment by developing 20,000 square meters of the Seoul Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Fil-gu, Seoul. On the 20,000 square meters, the Defendant said that “The removal of general housing is necessary; and (d) requested the removal of the removal construction

However, even if the defendant received money from the victim, he did not have the intention or ability to perform the removal work.

Ultimately, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, transferred KRW 5 million to the Busan Bank account in the name of G on December 22, 2006 from the victim, and transferred KRW 3 million to the Busan Bank account in the name of G on December 30, 2006, and acquired KRW 18 million in total by receiving KRW 10 million in cash at the end of February 2007 in Seoul Franchi City.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each protocol of suspect examination of the accused;

1. Each statement of C;

1. An investigation report (H representative I telephone statement), an investigation report (to hear a complainant's telephone statement), and an investigation report (to listen to the D phone statement of a witness);

1. Previous records: Criminal records, etc. inquiry reports and application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (Attachment of the same kind of case judgments);

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. The latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act (the principle of equity in cases where a judgment is rendered simultaneously with the judgment of fraud);