A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On May 15, 2008, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant, at the D golf course restaurant located in Gwangju Mine-gu, he would have a victim E be employed as a public official in technical service of Gwangju Viewing or the Mine Office, by speaking inside the main area to G with employment cost of KRW 30,00,000.”

However, even if the defendant receives money from the victim, he did not have the intention or ability to have the victim work as a public official in the technical service of Gwangju Viewing or Mine Office.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, obtained 30 million won (in 10 million won cashier's checks) from the victim for employment compensation from the victim, that is, he obtained from the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on cashier's checks;

1. Relevant Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of criminal punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence [Scope of Recommendation] General Fraud (less than KRW 100,000) and the mitigated area (one month to one year) [Special Mitigation] [Determination of Sentence] and the circumstances constituting the sentencing conditions indicated in the records of this case, such as the following circumstances and Defendant’s age, character and behavior, family relationship, home environment, motive and means of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., shall be determined as ordered by taking into account:

The defendant's act of fraud in this case is not a good crime because the defendant acquired a large amount of money from the victim by making a false statement about the solicitation of employment.

The Defendant did not endeavor to recover damage for a long time due to the fact that he left for eight years after the crime of this case.

The favorable circumstances: the defendant recognizes his mistake and reflects his mistake.

After the prosecution of this case, the Defendant agreed with the victim after paying damages to the victim.

The defendant shall exceed a fine.