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

The Defendant had worked as a person from around 2007 to around 2011 as a person who had worked as a person from D (hereinafter referred to as “D”) to obtain approval for a permanent industrial complex that was being promoted D, and did not have any specific income, and did not receive expenses from D. In addition, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay money even if he/she borrowed money from others without any specific property.

Nevertheless, on November 12, 2009, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim G with the purport that “If an attorney-at-law loaning KRW 40 million as he/she needs to recover F land, he/she will repay the principal and pay the two-part interest within six months,” at the D office located in Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Jongno-gu.

Ultimately, the Defendant was issued KRW 40 million by cashier’s checks on the same spot from the victim’s position.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's partial statement in the first protocol of trial;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. The police statement concerning G;

1. Each investigation report (the confirmation report of the fact and the confirmation report relating to the ability to perform);

1. Standard balance sheet;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on loan certificates and cashier's checks copies;

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

1. The Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion on the assertion of the Defendant and the defense counsel under Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution (hereinafter referred to as the grounds for sentencing) are proved to have been proved by asserting that: (a) the Defendant lent KRW 40 million from the victim a loan of KRW 25 million from the victim to F descendants H as the litigation cost; and (b) the remainder of KRW 15 million was used as the litigation cost related to the business of a permanent agricultural and industrial complex; (c) the Defendant and the defense counsel did not believe that he/she would be able to receive money when winning a lawsuit or completing the business of a permanent agricultural and industrial complex of D company; and (d) the Defendant and the defense counsel had the ability to repay at the time.

1.2.2.3 Does, Does.