except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On March 5, 2010, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim E in the D Tax Accounting Firm Office located in Gunsan City, stating that “I will set up a right to collateral security at the 198 square meters of G forest in the name of the F, and make a repayment until August 2010, if I lent 55 million won to the victim E because I would need to pay the hospital expenses after being written stroked down.”

However, the Defendant did not have any specific income or property at the time and did not have any obligation. The forest land in the above FF name had already been registered with H on October 15, 2008, and there was no intention or ability to set up the right to collateral security against the victim, and even if he borrowed money from the victim, there was no intention or ability to complete payment.

On March 5, 2010, the Defendant received 55 million won in total from the account in the name of the Defendant for the purpose of borrowing money from the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant was accused by deceiving the victim and received 5 million won.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. A copy of the written agreement or a cash custody certificate;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a copy of passbook transaction;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 347 of the Election of Imprisonment;

1. The reason for the suspended sentence under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is that the amount of deceitation is not significant, and that the defendant denies the criminal act that was committed in the early stage of the investigation, etc., which is disadvantageous to the defendant, such as the condition of sentencing that is disadvantageous to the defendant, the circumstance that the defendant was committed at the time of and against the defendant, the circumstance that the defendant was unable to repay the borrowed money due to the aggravation of economic conditions since the date of the loan of this case, the victim was not punished, the fact that the defendant did not have the criminal power in the same kind of crime, and other conditions of sentencing favorable to the defendant, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime