A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

Around November 21, 2007, the Defendant concluded that “E” for the victim’s “E” operated by the Victim D, which is located under the Yongsan-gu Seoul Building 106, Gyeonggi-gu, Gyeonggi-gu, Gyeonggi-gu, Seoul-do, the Defendant would return the principal to the victim after the three-month period, stating that “If the Plaintiff is running the Home Standards Business in China, the students to move into China have already been secured, and the apartment is also prepared. If the Defendant invests ten million won, then one million won per month after the three-month period.”

However, in the event that the Defendant was under considerable financial pressure due to the failure of the public performance business that was in progress, there was no intention or ability to deliver the profits to the victim by investing the money in the Home Standards Business even if he received money from the victim.

After all, on November 22, 2007, the defendant acquired 10 million won from the victim to the new bank account (Account Number:F) in the name of the defendant as business funds.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's partial statement in the first protocol of trial;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Complaints, etc.;

1. Details of transactions, each specification of transactions, customer information;

1. Investigation report (report accompanied by documents submitted by G), which is a statement;

1. An agreement and a performance planning document;

1. An investigation report (a report on confirmation of a suspect's counterpart account for remittance);

1. An investigation report (referring to a report on hearing statements of a witness H);

1. Each specification of transactions;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a criminal investigation report;

1. The pertinent Article of the Criminal Act and Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act regarding criminal facts, and the argument of the defendant and his/her defense counsel are asserted that the defendant and his/her defense counsel have no intention to commit fraud.

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this Court, the JAB initiated by the Defendant at the time of the instant crime

The fact that the holding of the proposal was unsatisfyed, and the defendant's money received from the victim is not a project of the Home Standards.