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

The application for compensation of this case is dismissed.

Punishment of the crime

In consideration of related civil cases, the defendant is a person who engages in printing business with the trade name "E" in the old and American City D to the extent that it does not interfere with the defendant's exercise of his/her right to defense.

On February 1, 2013, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim C, stating, “The machinery in the office is installed as owned by all the company. The business profitability is good when the business is stamped on the machinery. If the company makes an investment of KRW 50 million, the investment amount shall be returned after one year, and the amount of the investment shall be returned after 3.5 million won per month (the monthly salary, KRW 1.5 million, and KRW 2 million).”

However, the machinery that the Defendant called the victim's own possession was entirely owned by the Defendant with F, or most of them were owned by F alone, and even if the Defendant received money from the victim, there was no intention or ability to return the agreed profit, or to return the investment money.

Ultimately, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received 50 million won in total from the victim on or around the 6th day of the same month, and received 25 million won in total from around the 18th day of the same month as investment money.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police protocol against C, G, and F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a copy of a notarial deed (investment contract), or a copy of a notarial deed (a notarial deed of debt repayment contract for security);

1. Relevant Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of criminal punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 32(1)3 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Lawsuits, etc. of Application for Compensation Order (the filing of application after the closing of pleadings, and the scope of liability for compensation is not clear) is that the victim was accompanying the bus company and was able to live together with the defendant's oral statement, reliance upon the above company's resignation, and made a joint investment in the whole property of the defendant, but the machinery believed as security is F's objection and that of the defendant.