A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

On July 22, 2013, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “Around July 22, 2013, the Plaintiff, the agent of the victim D, E, and the victim F, would have the right to sell a unit unit of the Seo-gu G reconstruction apartment (331) in Busan, Seo-gu, the contractor, and to sell the reconstruction apartment in lots,” and said H as the head of the headquarters.

However, in fact, the Defendant did not have been delegated with the authority to dispose of the right to sell the reconstruction apartment units or to enter into an agency contract for the sale of the reconstruction apartment units by H, and did not work as the head of H's headquarters. Therefore, even if the Defendant received money from the victims as the deposit money for the execution of the agency contract,

Nevertheless, the defendant deceivings the victims by the above method and received a total of KRW 30 million from the victims, each of which is KRW 15 million.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement with respect to E, I, and F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to an agreement on vicarious sale of buildings in lots, a copy of a check on his own check, a letter of confirmation, an extension of the payment agreement, and iron, official document, and business registration certificate;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of punishment for the crime, Articles 347 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act does not specify the amount of fraud of this case, and the defendant paid a total of 5 million won among them (the J intended to repay the amount of KRW 10 million out of the amount of fraud of this case, but not yet repaid). Meanwhile, it appears that the defendant had a conclusive intention and did not acquire money from victims (the notification of termination of the construction contract to H is given by the G and the Commercial Building Reconstruction Project Association on November 11, 2013), and the crime is against the law.