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

From 199 to 88,00 won due to stock investment loss, the Defendant did not have any property or income in addition to the paid-in capital from C to 1.2 million won each month, and there was no other property or income in addition to the paid-in capital from C. The payment of the paid-in capital at the parent hospital expense is an inevitable circumstance, so there was no intention or ability to complete the payment even if the Defendant borrowed money from others.

Nevertheless, around November 29, 2011, the Defendant made a false statement to the C Central Monitoring Office located in Dobong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, stating that “The Defendant would have to pay off without money if he/she lends money to the victim E due to lack of funds to operate his/her own car business.”

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim E, received KRW 2,400,000 from the Defendant’s stand account on the pretext of borrowing the victim E-the-counter loan, and received KRW 37,50,000 from that time to August 30, 2012 in total from August 30, 2012.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution (the fact that there is no history of punishment for an excessive punishment, and that the defendant shows his/her intention of not to punish a victim by agreement with both the victim after detention on June 27, 2013