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

Punishment of the crime

On January 18, 2009, the Defendant entered into a new construction construction contract for E-family housing with the victim D at the C office of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Seoul Special Metropolitan City Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter referred to as the “C office”) on January 18, 2009, and received 40 square 5 bonds that will be newly constructed at the site as substitute.

The apartment price is 400 million won, and the purchase price is 300 million won which will be transferred in KRW 300 million. If the project for the design of the new E-family housing project is not implemented or there is a variable, it is false that the 300 million won will be responsible and returned, and the interest of the bank for the 300 million won borrowed will be paid on a yearly basis.

However, it is not clear that the defendant is unable to receive the land survey by the reason that the contact with the representative G of the building owner F Co., Ltd. is not smooth, and it is difficult to operate the project from around 2001, and there was no intention or ability to get the apartment sold to the victim or to return KRW 300 million to the victim.

On January 19, 2009, the Defendant received KRW 300,000 from the injured party at the national bank account (Account Number: H) in the name of the Defendant for the purchase price of apartment at around 14:30 on January 19, 200.

Accordingly, the defendant, by deceiving the victim and receiving KRW 300 million, acquired it by fraud.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness D and G;

1. Partial statement of I;

1. A sale transfer contract, a building design contract, a special agreement on the construction design, and an apartment supply contract;

1. Receipts:

1. A notice of credit information and tax investigation results [the defendant and his defense counsel] asserts to the effect that the defendant had no intention to acquire it by deception due to intent and ability to repay.

In other words, the defendant entered into a design contract with the KOF and issued a sales contract for five apartment bonds in lieu of the down payment, but the KOF would pay the cash.