When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

On September 29, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced by the Seoul High Court to imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (special rape) and four years of suspension of execution on September 7, 2016 and the said judgment became final and conclusive on October 7, 2016.

On July 2, 2015, the Defendant additionally borrowed KRW 2 million from the same place on September 21, 2016 to the effect that “The Defendant borrowed KRW 3 million from tin to 3 million, i.e., borrowed KRW 2 million in addition, to 7.5 million from Gyeong-gu, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul, and KRW 12 309,000,000 from 12 309,000 to 3 million from 2 million from 200,000 to 3 million from 200,000 won (a loan of KRW 5 million and repayment of KRW 3 million from July 2, 2016).”

However, even if the Defendant was given a loan from the beginning, the Defendant did not have any intention or ability to pay the principal and interest because there are many other liabilities.

The defendant deceivings the victim in the above manner, and acquired a total of five million won from the victim by borrowing it.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Protocol of the police statement concerning B;

1. A complaint;

1. Certificate of remittance;

1. Details of passbook transactions; and

1. Loan transaction contract;

1. A certificate of remittance and a statement of transactions;

1. Previouss before judgment: Application of criminal records, inquiry records, and criminal defendant's statutory statement Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of punishment;

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. In light of the fact that the defendant confessions and reflects the crime for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the criminal records before the ruling and the latter concurrent crimes under Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the fact that there is no same criminal record, the sentence like the order shall be sentenced to the defendant.