However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On June 19, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year in six months of imprisonment due to a violation of the Act on Origin Labeling of Agricultural and Fishery Products, and the judgment was finalized on June 27, 2014.

On January 6, 2014, the Defendant loaned KRW 20 million to the victim’s “G” beauty room operated by the victim F in Seoul Special Metropolitan City E-1, which is operated by the victim F, “G”. The Defendant also exported and manages the company.

“.....”

However, at the time, the defendant was bad and not fixed income, and the defendant was operated by him.

H Co., Ltd. had no intent or ability to repay money from the injured party, because the rehabilitation procedure was in progress.

Nevertheless, the defendant deceivings the victim as above, and on the same day, he was issued two copies of the check to himself as the borrowed money from the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. A copy of each loan certificate, a copy of each check for himself/herself, and a copy of data related to corporate rehabilitation;

1. Records of crime: Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes attached to a reply to inquiries, such as criminal history, and documents attached to a criminal investigation report (Evidence Serial No. 24);

1. Relevant Article 347 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

2. The first sentence of Article 37 of the Criminal Act to treat concurrent crimes: Provided, That the first sentence of Article 39 (1) shall be applicable;

3. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended execution.

1. Whether the sentencing criteria are applied or not, falls under the concurrent crimes of the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the sentencing criteria are not applied.

2. The crime of this case in which the sentence of sentence is to be sentenced is not appropriate to be committed by deceiving the victim and deceiving the victim of KRW 20 million.

On the other hand, on the other hand, it is not clear that the defendant's fraud of the money in the name of the borrowed money was not subject to the degree of deception.

I seem to appear.

The defendant is attempting to commit the crime of this case, and his mistake is divided.