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.

On April 2017, the Defendant was able to post a telephone to an employee who is unable to know the name of the Plaintiff’s Hyundai Savings Bank at a place where the Defendant was a police officer, and he was able to repay the amount of KRW 30 million at the face of the week.

There shall be no default of national taxes.

By making a false statement, “A credit transaction agreement was concluded on April 18, 2019 with a view to paying interest of 26.9% per annum for 24 months from April 18, 2017 to April 18, 2019 and repaying the principal.

However, the Defendant, on April 1, 2017, failed to pay national taxes of KRW 30 million at the Port Tax Office of Korea on April 1, 2017, which was prior to the above lending, and KRW 60 million at the racing Tax Office, and was scheduled to execute the Defendant’s property, such as the Defendant’s real estate, first priority, due to the Defendant’s failure to pay national taxes of KRW 30 million at the Defendant’s tax office, and there was a loan equivalent to KRW 110 million at the financial institution. As such, even if the Defendant received a loan from the injured party, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to pay interest for 24 months and repay the principal within the specified period.

On April 18, 2017, the Defendant received 30 million won from the damaged party under the name of the Defendant’s Daegu Bank account (D) under the name of the Defendant.

Accordingly, the defendant acquired money by deceiving the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. E statements;

1. Investigation report (non-loan, etc. when national taxes in arrears occur);

1. Application of credit transaction agreements, and credit information-related Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 347 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act on the Suspension of Execution (Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (Article 62(1) of the same Act) states that the victimized company will not want the punishment of the Defendant by making a serious effort to recover damage by repaying a part of the amount after prosecution, etc., and that the victimized company will not want the punishment of the Defendant. It is a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act in 2008.