However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of one year and six months from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The Defendant is an insurance solicitor. The Defendant was an insurance solicitor. Around December 2007, the Defendant was unable to pay the principal and interest of the Defendant’s debt exceeding KRW 100 million, and the Defendant was unable to receive money from the victim C who became aware of as the insured, and was used to invest the money in the stocks, to repay the debt to other persons, and to pay interest to the victim or to gambling, etc., and the profits from investment in the stocks can be continuously generated, and the victim could not return the principal to the victim if the investment was failed. However, the Defendant did not at all say that the Defendant made an investment in the funds to the suspect, and without stating that it was an investment to the victim, the Defendant would pay 12% interest per annum to the victim on December 2007, “D” in the name of the Defendant, where the Defendant sent KRW 30,000 to B. The principal shall be repaid up to the end of January 209, which he received from the victim on December 31, 2007.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The prosecutor's interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Each police interrogation protocol against the accused;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. C Complaints;

1. Police investigation report (additional statement by a complainant);

1. Each certificate of borrowing;

1. Each statement of transactions in our bank [the defendant was confused with 130 million won or more at the time of the instant case, and most of the monthly wages at the time of the police at the time of the Defendant himself stated that the situation was urgent even if he repaid to the existing debtor (Evidence No. 186 pages), the Defendant used approximately KRW 10 million out of the above fraud No. 30 million for the repayment of obligations to other creditors, and the Defendant did not repay 2/3 of the damage amount until the five years have passed after the instant crime, it is reasonable to deem that there was a criminal intent to commit the crime of defraudation to the Defendant].

1. The corresponding provisions of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts; and