The Defendant, from March 2014, 2017 to 70, had been living as “the party watch keeping of law,” such as carrying out the work of the party watch in D, which is located in the Gyeongnam-gun, Busan-gun.

On May 31, 2014, the Defendant borrowed money from the victim E to the victim E (hereinafter “D”) on or around May 31, 2014. The Defendant would receive a subsidy and repay the borrowed money to the victim E (hereinafter “D”) in the end, when the tiny managed by D becomes a national holiday.

The phrase “ makes a false statement.”

However, even if D’s tin payment was won on the national newsletter, there was no plan to pay the subsidy, and even if the domestic subsidy was paid, D did not allow D to use it for the purpose of repaying the previous loan, and at the time there was no property owned by the Defendant, there was no particular income, and there was no intention or ability to pay the subsidy even if D’s tin payment was made by repeatedly lending money from the neighboring person by means of return and by means of payment of interest, and was wasted as expenses for personal living and water supply.

As such, the Defendant, as well as the Defendant, by deceiving the victim and being granted KRW 5,00,00,000 from the victim in the name of the construction cost on the same day, was granted from the victim, from that time to December 14, 2016, received KRW 385,260,000 in total from four victims over 62 occasions, such as the statement in the list of crimes in attached Form.

Accordingly, the defendant, by deceiving the victims, received property from the victims.

The Defendant, on March 2, 2014, borrowed money from the victim G in Daegu Seo-gu on March 2, 2014 to the Defendant, “I wish to complete the payment of money to the victim after the loan to the victim.”

The head of the Tong in which one million won is included shall be entrusted as security.

“............ the passbook in the agricultural bank account in Defendant’s name was opened.”

However, in fact, the above account was suspended from payment, and thus there was no security value, and the defendant at the time.