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 December 10, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for fraud in Daegu District Court and racing support, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on the 18th of the same month, and on March 30, 2017, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of six months for a violation of the Labor Standards Act by the same court on March 30, 2017.

4.7. A person for whom the above judgment has become final and conclusive.

On March 25, 2008, the Defendant stated that the “D” office in the Defendant’s operation of the racing-si (hereinafter “D”) was false to the victim E (hereinafter “V”) that “The Defendant would lend KRW 15 million as it is necessary to pay money for the steel structure processing business,” one month after the purchase of the said KRW 15 million to the victim E.

However, the defendant had no intention or ability to repay the above money even if he borrowed the money from the injured party, because he had borne the debt equivalent to about 4 billion won at the time.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, as seen above, received a total of KRW 15 million from the time of deceiving the victim and received remittance to the D account operated by the Defendant on the same day until October 17, 2008, and acquired it by remittance of KRW 35 million through three times, such as the statement in the list of crimes, from October 17, 2008.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's legal statement (as at the fourth date);

1. A protocol concerning the examination of suspects of the accused or F by the prosecution;

1. Statement of the defendant in the first and third public trial records;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Details of deposits, written commitment performance, and certificate of borrowing;

1. A previous conviction in judgment: A reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, report on confirmation of criminal history, and application of each written judgment;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment (elective of imprisonment);

1. After Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 39 (1) of the same Act:

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

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The crime of this case in sentencing guidelines is one of the concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Code, which has become final and conclusive, with regard to the crime of this case.