However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

[2] The Defendant is a person who has operated J Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “J”).

On January 30, 2009, the Defendant was a bad credit holder at the time, and the above J, which was operated without any particular active property, was delinquent in paying wages to workers, and not less than 100 million won in national taxes such as value added tax in 2008, and there was no expected business site for profits, even if he borrowed money from others on the agreed date, even though he did not have an objective ability to pay the said principle on the agreed date, he was called a female victim K by phoneing the above Defendant to the above company with a view to facing the economic situation as a person operating a construction company with a view to normal conditions, and thus, he would pay the said principle with the interest of 10% per month within 2 months after borrowing five million won or more.

In fact, from around December 18, 2009 to around December 2009, the victim by deceiving the victim by the same method over 20 times, such as the list of crimes in attached Table 20 times from around that time, such as receiving five million won from the injured party who believed this as the money borrowed on the same day from the defendant's wife for the same day, and by deceiving the victim as a sum of 7,410,000 won.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness M and K;

1. Investigation reports (Attachment of decisions on default of taxes at the time of operation of the J);

1. Court rulings (the loans of 2016Ga group 1129), Incheon District Court Decision 2009 High Court Decision 3522 decided Feb. 2, 2009

1. A copy of the written opinion;

1. A written confirmation for payment;

1. A passbook;