Around November 14, 2013, the Defendant introduced the victim E from Dong, which was ordinarily known to, and made a false statement to, the victim D and the victim “I would have to receive an investment from others, and deposit 50 million won in the passbook if I would have borrowed money to investors as I would like to show the balance of the passbook and make it possible for investors to borrow money, so I would have to pay interest immediately if I would have borrowed money.”

However, in fact, the defendant received 50 million won from the victim and thought that he would pay it to others. The F Co., Ltd. that the defendant operated had no intention or ability to pay the money borrowed from the victim due to the lack of any other income, such as the enemy's operation from October 2012.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received 50 million won from the victim to the new bank account in the name of the Defendant, and acquired by deceiving the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement of E and G;

1. A complaint;

1. A certificate of borrowing;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on financial transactions;

1. Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, Article 347(1) of the choice of punishment, the reason for sentencing of imprisonment [the scope of recommending punishment] General Fraud (6-100 million won or less) / [decision of sentence] The defendant did not have been punished for fraud even though there are many people who had been punished for fraud, and committed a second crime without being involved in it, and even though he had given considerable time to reach agreement, he did not take measures for recovery of damage to the victim, so the defendant is subject to severe punishment corresponding to the liability for the crime, and such punishment shall be determined and sentenced as ordered.