A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who engages in agricultural products distribution business with the trade name "D" in the south of the Navy C.

1. Around May 2013, the Defendant stated that “The Defendant would purchase 12,50,000 won of capital in the field of capital reduction of the victim F, the victim F, located in the Namnam-gun E and the same Gun G,” from May 2013.

However, the defendant did not have the intention or ability to pay the price even if he purchases capital from the victim.

After the Defendant entered into a contract for the purchase of capital by deceiving the victim as above, the Defendant received capital reduction equivalent to KRW 12.5 million at the market price of KRW 43 million in the above E and G.

2. Around June 2013, the Defendant stated that “Around June 2013, the Defendant would purchase a 5 million won spawd from the spathy field of the victim’s fish field of the instant victim in the Namnam-nam Navy G and the victim’s fish field in the same Gun G and the same H.”

However, the defendant did not have the intention or ability to pay the price even if he purchases the exchange from the victim.

After entering into a bilateral strike by deceiving the victim as above, the Defendant obtained a double wave of an amount equivalent to KRW 5 million at the market price harvested from the double wave of the victim in the above G and H, and acquired it by fraud.

3. On October 2013, the Defendant: (a) around the end of October 2013, 2013, the Defendant stated that the Defendant would pay KRW 10 million to the Defendant for the payment of the purchase price of the scrap mash, selling the scrap mash harvested from this field to Na; and (b) the payment of the purchase price of the scrap mash in full by selling it to Na.”

However, the defendant did not have the intention or ability to pay the price even if he purchases the horses from the victim.

The Defendant, as seen above, made a false purchase contract by deceiving the victim and concluded a false purchase contract by the victim of the above H.