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

On May 7, 2012, the Defendant was transferred KRW 10 million from the victim’s account in the name of the Defendant to the account (E) in the name of the Defendant, on the following grounds: (a) on May 7, 2012, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “A restaurant operated by the Defendant in Seo-gu, Busan would lend money to people and receive interest from the victim; and (b) if he/she borrowed money, he/she would give interest on KRW 1.5 per month and pay the principal within one year.”

However, the defendant was planned to use the above money borrowed from the victim as the defendant's gambling fund, while the defendant was at the time responsible for gambling debts, etc., while the restaurant operator did not have any intent or ability to repay the money even if he borrowed money from the victim because there was a lot of income in the restaurant.

In addition, the Defendant received from around that time to November 23, 2012 a total of KRW 80 million by deceiving the victim as indicated in the following crime sight table.

On May 7, 2012, 100: “The amount of money lent to people and received interest from gambling places” means 10,000,000,000 or 30,000 on May 14, 2012; “The principal shall be repaid within one year from the lending of such money to the people; and the interest shall be paid on the lending of 1.5,000,000 or 10,000 on June 25, 2012; 10,000,000 on April 31, 2012; 10,000,00,00 or5,00 on August 6, 200, 200; 10,000,000 on August 6, 200, 2000; 10,0000 on June 10, 200, 2009;

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (informating details of transfer of suspect A account);

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;

1. The reason for sentencing under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 38(1)2, Article 50 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Concurrent Crimes [the scope of recommendations in the sentencing guidelines] - The area of mitigation (from 100 million to 1 year) (the scope of recommendations in the sentencing guidelines) - The area of special mitigation (from 100 million to 1 year): The amount of punishment is not imposed or significant damage is recovered.