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

The defendant is not guilty of fraud against the victim C. The defendant is not guilty in the judgment of this case.

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal Power] On September 24, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment by the Incheon District Court due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (not after the accident), and the said judgment became final and conclusive on April 25, 2015.

【Criminal Facts】

"2014 Highest 8873"

1. On October 20, 201, the Defendant against the victim D was transferred KRW 1.5 million to the victim D, and the Defendant was transferred KRW 6 million around October 25, 201 to the victim F in Seo-gu Incheon, Seo-gu, Incheon, to the victim D, as if the Defendant had no intent or ability to perform the construction work as agreed upon even if the Defendant entered into a contract with the victim for the interior construction of the apartment, and as if he would normally engage in the interior construction, he would normally engage in the artificial apartment construction. The Defendant was transferred KRW 1.5 million from the victim as the name of the artificial apartment 152 Dong 1303, which is the victim’s ownership, to the victim’s transfer of KRW 1.5 million from October 22, 201.

2. On April 22, 2013, the Defendant against the victim H refers to the victim H at the J office located in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul. The fact is that the victim did not have the intent or ability to perform the internal test of K Apartment No. 10 Dong 1901, the victim owned, but could normally perform the said work despite the absence of the intent or capacity to perform the said work, and it was transferred from April 23, 2013 to May 3, 2013 in total KRW 14 million from the victim to May 3, 2013.

"2014 Highest 8945"

3. Fraud against victims L;

A. A. Around December 13, 2012, the Defendant, on December 13, 2012, entered into a false statement to the victim L, stating that “The Defendant would pay the price if he/she delivered the singcam for the delivery of the scam.”

However, the defendant did not have the intention or ability to settle the price even if he was supplied with the Washington by the victim.

Accordingly, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, obtained a supply of 2,470,000 won from the victim, by deceiving him.

B. On January 8, 2013, the defrauded around January 8, 2013.