However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On October 18, 2011, the Defendant told the victim E to the effect that “The Defendant would lend all the money he/she has to pay the money in exchange for the loan, and if so, will use the money for one month and pay the 5-paid interest.”

However, in fact, the Defendant had a debt up to 400 million won under her husband’s name, and was in the situation of having revolving funds by preventing the return of bonds, so even if the Defendant borrowed money to the victim, there was no intention or ability to repay it.

As above, the Defendant, as well as the Defendant, by deceiving the victim and being granted KRW 10,00,000,00 from the victim, to the point of time, from May 15, 2012, issued KRW 206,590,00 over 25 times in total, as indicated in the list of crimes in the annexed crime.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Detailed statement of each transaction;

1. Copy of the loan certificate;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to certified copies of each process deed;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act / [the scope of recommended punishment] In general frauds: Type 2 (at least KRW 100 million, but less than KRW 500 million), the special mitigation area (at least March 10 through February 6): The rise in the first step [special mitigation person] of the type as a result of the combination of identical competition, where the victim is fully responsible for the occurrence of the crime or the expansion of damage, if the victim is also responsible for the occurrence of the crime or for the expansion of damage, it is not that the case is less that of the crime by deceiving a large amount of money [determination of sentence].

Provided, That the same type as the order shall be determined in consideration of the circumstances, such as the fact agreed with the victim and the first offender.