However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The Defendant, starting on June 26, 2012, and ending on April 26, 2013, was the subject of the number system of KRW 30 million. The victim C, who was aware of the Defendant by introducing a letter around 2011, was a member of the fraternity to which the Defendant was enrolled.

On June 2012, the Defendant made a false call to the victim of the early police officer who called the victim and called “(10 million won) to enter the 8th number system in order to start the 30 million foot number system (10 million won in each month).”

However, the Defendant was at least KRW 10,000 per month on a monthly basis with the monthly payment to be made in lieu of the borrowed money to the members of the fraternity, and at least KRW 100,000 per month with the personal obligation to pay KRW 100,000 per month with the amount of KRW 23,00,000 per month. Ultimately, the Defendant had no intention or ability to operate the monthly payment with the personal obligation to repay the obligation to others.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim to the effect that the Defendant would keep up to a normal way and let the victim get out of the amount of KRW 30 million,00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 were received every month from the victim, from June 26, 2012 to December 24, 2012, and obtained the delivery of KRW 21,00,00,000 as a monthly payment through seven occasions.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each police statement made to C, D, and E;

1. A complaint;

1. The text of the decision on support by father in Incheon;

1. Each investigation report (referring to witness F, G telephone conversations) [the defendant and his defense counsel asserted to the effect that there was no intention to commit fraud at the time. However, considering the defendant's obligation relationship recognized by the records of this case and the fact that the defendant continued to receive three million won monthly payment without notifying the victim of such circumstances even though the instant guidance was spread around October 2012, at least, taking into account the following: