A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

"2016 Highest 2296"

1. Fraud;

A. On October 2013, the Defendant acquired the sales deposit by fraud, the following false statements: (a) the victim was working as a vice head in the E office for the victim’s operation of the Geumcheon-gu Busan Metropolitan City Steering Party D; (b) the F is responsible for the management of G human resources and vehicle management; and (c) the F is expected to terminate the contract with the maintenance company of the G delivery vehicle; (d) it is expected that the contract will be terminated, but the deposit will be refunded at the expiration of the contract period.”

However, in fact, the defendant retired from F around 2010, and F did not have any fact in charge of G's human resources management and vehicle management.

Furthermore, the Defendant did not have any authority with respect to the vehicle management and contract of G, and only intended to use the money received from the victim as living expenses, repayment of debts, etc. due to a large amount of debt at the time, and did not have the intent or ability to conclude the contract with G, and did not have any intention or ability to return the deposit.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received KRW 2 million from the victim’s office around October 18, 2013 at the victim’s office, and received KRW 8 million at the same place around October 21, 2013, and received KRW 20 million from the same place around October 25, 2013, and received KRW 30 million in total as the deposit for the deposit for the deposit for the lease of the occupant.

B. On November 1, 2013, the Defendant acquired the vehicle by fraud, saying, at the victim’s office around November 1, 2013, the Defendant would pay the price at the time of the settlement of the G price scheduled on November 15, 2013.

However, at the time of fact, the defendant did not have the right to contract with G, so there was no intention or ability to pay the victim the other party.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, had the victim change the terms of the vehicle owned by the Defendant on the same day, thereby making the victim change the terms of the vehicle owned by the Defendant, and thereby making a property interest equivalent to one million won.