A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for nine 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

1. Around January 24, 2017, the criminal defendant against the victim B made a false statement to the effect that “Around January 24, 2017, the defendant was making phone calls to the victim to the effect that “A house implementation project is being carried out for the G site located in the Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Incheon, along with the chairperson of “A city and (State) D,” and (E). However, the defendant made a false statement with the purport that “A house implementation project is being carried out for the G site

However, in fact, the Defendant was not the Chairperson of (State)C and (State)D due to bad credit standing at the time, and did not have the right to remove the above business, and was planned to use two million won for the purpose of living expenses of the Defendant, etc. with remittance from the victim, and thus, there was no intention or ability to return the right to remove or two million won.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, on the same day, acquired 2 million won from the victim through the I Bank account (J) in the name of the Defendant’s wife under the same name on the same day. On April 21, 2017, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim by the above means, and by deceiving the victim, wired 1 million won from the victim to the above account.

2. On September 29, 2016, the Defendant against the victim K made a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant would pay KRW 60 million, which is double the principal, if the PF would be paid within six months after obtaining the authorization and permission within the six months, if the Defendant borrowed KRW 30 million to the victim for expenses incurred in granting the last authorization and permission on the G site located in Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City.”

However, due to bad credit standing at the time, the Defendant did not have the authority to input the authorization and permission expenses related to the above business or to receive the PF Fund on behalf of the State and (State)D, which is the subject of the above implementation business, and used it for the purpose of paying the Defendant's existing debts, living expenses, etc.