When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

On November 19, 2012, the Defendant found the victim mountain and C branch in the third floor of Pyeongtaek-si B building on November 19, 2012, and falsely stated that “B is working for a business entity called D company, which would have been making a loan of KRW 3 million, the Defendant would have the principal and interest equally repaid KRW 300,000 for a period of 13 months.”

The defendant did not have any intention or ability to repay even if he did not work for the above business and borrowed the above money.

As such, the Defendant received KRW 3 million as a loan by deceiving the victim, and acquired financial benefits.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police statement of E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a copy of loan application and a copy of repayment contract;

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

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

1. Articles 70 and 69(2) of the former Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 12575, May 14, 2014).

1. The amount of a summary order issued shall be reduced by taking into account the following factors: (a) the accused confessions the reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act; (b) the accused has no same criminal record; and (c) the accused commits the instant fraud according to the direction of a lending hub; and (d) the Defendant has not consumed or retained most of the criminal proceeds; and