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 October 22, 2014, the Defendant, while purchasing EM5 vehicles from Mano Samsung C’s agencies located in SM5, applied for a loan of KRW 24.9% per annum and 60 months in equal installments of the principal and interest of the vehicle at a rate of 4.9% per annum when the Defendant applied for a loan of KRW 24.5 million to the employees belonging to the Korea Social Services Korea Co., Ltd. Co., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd. for the purchase fund.

A false statement was made.

However, in fact, the Defendant did not have any particular property and had a debt of approximately KRW 20 million, and was thought to purchase a vehicle and sell it for the vehicle, and thus there was no intention or ability to repay even if he borrowed money from the damaged person as a fund for the purchase of the vehicle.

Nevertheless, the defendant deceivings the victim as above and received 24.5 million won as the fund for purchasing vehicles on the same day from the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Partial statement concerning the suspect interrogation protocol of the defendant by the prosecution;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. A complaint;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the current status of deposits in preparation for repayment, such as an agreement on installment financing, certificate of employment, certification of contents, and deposit in a country of origin

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense;

1. Grounds for conviction under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Da1448, Apr. 1, 201);

1. The Defendant alleged that he/she had the intent and ability to repay the loan, and he/she did not pay the loan after the fact that he/she was unable to do so on the wind, thereby having no intention to commit fraud.

2. Review:

A. Whether fraud is established through deception of property legal principles shall be determined at the time of receipt of the property, and the criminal intent of defraudation, which is a subjective element of fraud, shall be determined at the time of receipt of the property. The criminal intent of defraudation, which is a subjective element of fraud, is not confession of the defendant.