A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On March 208, 2008, the Defendant called the victim C, who had been working at the work site prior to the date not later than 2008, saying, “The Defendant purchased 100 square meters from the land located in Echeon-si, Gyeonggi-do, which is the ownership of the company within which he works in Korea, at KRW 560,00 per square year, and then invested at KRW 650,000 per square year, which would be KRW 650,00 per square year.”

However, in fact, the Defendant, who served as the head of the department, explained false development information, etc. on forests and fields to many unspecified persons by telephone or other means, through the business employees, such as the Lomater, etc., and did not have the ability to increase the price of forests and fields within a short period as a planning real estate company, which sells low prices of forests and fields. There was no fact that the Defendant purchased the land located in Leecheon-si from the company. The Defendant did not have any intention or ability to complete payment even if he borrowed money from the victim due to his failure to receive the said benefits.

Nevertheless, on March 31, 2008, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received 11.2 million won from the victim to the new bank passbook in the name of the Defendant. In addition, from around that time to October 8, 2010, the Defendant acquired 6,4410,00 won in total from the victim, such as the list of crimes in the attached list of crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on account transactions, such as each copy of the judgment, a certified copy of cadastral map, a certified copy;

1. Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, Article 347(1) of the choice of criminal punishment, Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act, the fact that there is no criminal record of the same kind of reason for sentencing the choice of imprisonment, the fact that the victim and his family members have agreed smoothly, the possibility of re-offending through employment in the piracy company, and the fact that the possibility of re-offending seems to be low.