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

1. Defendant 2015 Highest 1033, while engaging in the vehicle sales business in around 2013, Defendant 2013 had been liable for the debt amounting to KRW 230 million and invested in money from each third party C, but failed to repay the debt amounting to KRW 150 million to the creditors.

On August 3, 2013, while the Defendant was instructed by the obligees to demand repayment, the Defendant was aware of it to change the obligees’ demand.

D “A loan of KRW 200 million is offered as security and two strawing vehicles as security and to pay money in lieu,” and D was known to it.

I tried to find out the persons who will lend money to E.

E calls from the victim F on August 4, 2013 to the victim F on or around August 4, 2013, to lend KRW 200 million to the victim F, to offer chere and 2 chere vehicles owned by the person as security, to pay 3 copies of interest and to pay within 15 days.

The term “affort lending money” was read as “affort lending money.”

However, the above two vehicles are not owned by the defendant, but are in custody by the entrustment of sale from the above C, and thus, they cannot be offered as a security. On the other hand, while the above two vehicles bear the liability of KRW 380 million, they did not have any intent or ability to repay the vehicle even if they borrowed money from another person without any specific property.

Ultimately, the Defendant, as seen above, by deceiving the victim through D and E, received the remittance of KRW 194 million from the victim to the bank account of E around August 5, 2013.

2. On September 19, 2014, Defendant G Co., Ltd. entered into a business agreement with the victim G Co., Ltd., a car rental business entity to operate a siren business upon entrustment from the victim G Co., Ltd., and operated the GJ’s business establishment from October 1, 2014 to March 31, 2015.