However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date of the final judgment.

From June 201 to December 201 of the same year, the Defendant was working for “D” as a distributor of young children’s book from around June 201 to around December 201, and was in a situation where the said company was required to pay damages equivalent to KRW 120 million and individually borrowed bonds, and thus, there was no intention or ability to pay the money from others even if borrowed money from others.

On May 201, the Defendant: (a) accessed the “F” to the victims C (the age of 30) who met at the EN club; and (b) took place as if the Defendant had worked as the LAart instructor at the G Center; (c) had been able to borrow money from the victims with continuous teaching tasks or marriage, and acquired money from the victims.

1. Around December 26, 2011, the Defendant made a false statement that “The Defendant would have been married to and repaid to the Defendant while living in a marriage if he/she had been in office in the G Center, with things equivalent to KRW 80,000,000 in the name of the workplace partnerJ, and has lent money to the company that he/she would have to pay back to the company,” at the “IMoel” located in the Northern-gu, Northern-gu, Seo-gu.

However, the fact is that the defendant has worked in the G Center or that the workplace rent J has an article equivalent to KRW 80 million in the name of the defendant, and there was no intention or ability to repay the money even if he borrowed money from the victim.

The Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, received from the victim a transfer of KRW 10 million in the name of a national bank account (Account Number:K) in the name of a national bank account (the director of the company of the accused) in the same day as the loan money.

2. Around February 4, 2012, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim that “I would have to live without compensating for the company” at the same place as the above paragraph 1, and that I would have to repay with marriage if I would have lent money.”

However, even if the victim borrowed money from the victim, there was no intention or ability to repay it.

The Defendant is identical to this.