2.Provided, That 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 November 13, 2012, the Defendant stated that “A victim C is not able to engage in a recycling business of domestic pest,” through D, in the vicinity of the Busan High-dong, Busan High-gu, and that “Around November 13, 2012, if the Defendant borrowed KRW 30 million, the Defendant would use it as a business fund and pay KRW 600,000 won as a monthly interest after three months.”

However, in fact, the Defendant was not only established a right to collateral security equivalent to KRW 460,00,000 of the maximum debt amount with respect to the apartment in the name of wife E, but also, even if the Defendant borrowed money from the victim with the debt that was not repaid with the money from the victim, he did not have the intent or ability to repay the debt as promised to do so, but also considered to be used as personal debt repayment, living expenses, etc. as well as business funds borrowed from the victim.

As above, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received from the victim a remittance of KRW 30 million around the 15th day of the same month under the pretext of borrowing money.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of the Act on the Statement of Evidence C

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing [the scope of liability for compensation is not clear) of Article 32(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings (in the case where a person engaged in special mitigation] intentionally commits a fraudulent act in the reduction area of types 1 (less than KRW 100 million) [the scope of recommending punishment] [the scope of recommending punishment] [the case where a person engaged in special mitigation] or the case where the degree of fraudulent act is weak [the case where a person engaged in a fraudulent act is suspended] - The main reason for the fraudulent act - the case where a principal reason for the fraudulent act is negative agreement - the case where a person engaged in a fraudulent act in a positive negligence or the degree of the fraudulent act is weak: the case where a person engaged in a fraudulent act in a significant amount of loss, or where a considerable damage is recovered [the prosecutor's opinion] one year [the case where a sentence is suspended