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

After having become aware of the so-called "work loan business entity," which received a loan from a financial institution by falsely preparing documents, etc. through online site search, the Defendant conspireds with D, E, F, G, etc., the above business entity, although the Defendant did not have concluded a lease contract on H-owned apartment, the Defendant concluded a lease contract on the above apartment and received a loan from a financial institution by falsely preparing a lease contract on the apartment, etc. as if the lease deposit was paid, as the Defendant did not have concluded a lease contract on the apartment, and received a lease deposit from a financial institution as security.

On October 19, 2012, in collusion with D, E, F, G, etc., the Defendant submitted a false apartment charter contract that was prepared as if the Defendant had a deposit of KRW 260 million with respect to 10,000,000,000 for 10,000,000 to the building owner, and entered into a pre-paid apartment lease contract with the employees in charge of the above bank loan at the Madong-dong, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Yong-gu, Seoul. The Defendant submitted a false apartment charter contract with the Defendant as if he had a deposit of KRW 260,00,000 for 10,000 for 10,000,000.

However, the Defendant did not actually concluded the aforementioned lease contract, and did not have paid the deposit, and even if the loan was executed, the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to pay the principal and interest normally.

The Defendant, in collusion with D, E, F, G, etc., by deceiving the said employee and obtaining the approval of the loan from the said employee, and received a remittance of KRW 80 million, which is owned by the victim bank, under the name of the Defendant on October 23, 2012, through the bank account opened in the name of the Defendant.

"2014 Highest 2131"

1. After the Defendant became aware of the so-called “work loan” business operator who obtained a loan from a financial institution by forging documents, etc. through the Internet site search, the Defendant conspired with D, E, and J, etc. who is the above business operator, and the Defendant entered into a lease contract for the apartment owned by H.