A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

On August 21, 2012, the Defendant obtained permission from the relevant authorities to conduct aggregate extraction projects in the Don-si Don-si D D D D D D D B at the present time.

By November 30, 2012, a loan of KRW 13 million is to be made by obtaining a license (by no later than December 31, 2012, and by no later than October 22, 2012, with respect to a loan borrowed on September 18, 2012, the loan is to be made by no later than March 31, 2013).

If a permit is obtained, a restaurant operation right may be granted to the aggregate extraction site.

In addition, if a restaurant is operated, the cargo truck is 1,00 cost inputs more than 1,50 drivers, and more than 100 drivers can take aggregate extractions for at least ten years, and a large amount of money can be punished by the F bank account (G) in the name of E on the same day from the person who believed to do so, and KRW 13 million was remitted to the F Bank account (G) in the name of E on the same day, and KRW 17 million around September 18, 2012, and received KRW 30 million from H upon request from the injured party on October 22, 2012.

However, it was practically impossible to obtain permission for aggregate extraction since the above strike was already filed by the defendant from March 2010 to December 201, 201, and there was a disposition such as nonpermission and return repeatedly on the grounds that the agricultural production infrastructure was maintained, the excellent farmland area where the agricultural production infrastructure was maintained, the area within 2 kilometers of designated cultural heritage of the State, and the area within one kilometer from the boundary of military installations, etc., and thus, it was not possible to obtain permission for aggregate extraction. Moreover, as at the time when the defendant or the defendant did not file an application for permission for development activities at the time of strike, there was no intention or ability to repay the above amount on the date of promise even if he received the above money from the injured party.

Accordingly, the defendant, by deceiving the victim, obtained 60 million won from the victim and acquired it by fraud.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Part C of the suspect interrogation protocol against the defendant