However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date of the final judgment.

1. On October 27, 2009, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim E by leaving a phone from the “Dcafeteria” operated by the Defendant in Jung-gu, Busan, to the effect that “it is necessary for his/her wife to take part in study. If his/her husband and wife borrowed KRW 10 million, he/she would return to his/her husband and wife after one year, he/she will return to his/her husband and wife. The interest will be calculated as appropriate until then.”

However, in fact, the above borrowed money was thought to be invested in the multi-stage business, and the financial institution did not have any intent or ability to repay the borrowed money with a debt of about 50 million won.

The Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 10 million from the victim to the new bank account in the name of husband F of the Defendant.

2. On December 2009, the Defendant sent a telephone to the victim E at the same place as above 1, 2009, and falsely speaked that “I will lend 3 million won only to you are studying abroad. I will complete.”

However, in fact, the above borrowed money was thought to be invested in the multi-stage business, and the financial institution did not have any intent or ability to repay the borrowed money with a debt of about 50 million won.

The Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim, received 3 million won from the victim to the new bank account in the name of husband F of the Defendant.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Complaint;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to written confirmation on deposits without passbook;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of applicable laws and punishments concerning the facts of crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

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

1. It is so decided as per Disposition on the grounds of not less than Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (including the fact that there is no criminal record of the same kind, the amount of defraudation is a relatively small amount, and the fact that the amount of defraudation is against it);