except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On January 13, 201, the Defendant purchased an F K7 passenger car in the name of the husband in the name of 32,950,000 under the name of her husband at D agency located in the Busan-gu Busan-gu, Busan-gu, the Defendant provided the above vehicle as a security for the loan if he/she lends KRW 30 million from the vehicle price to E in the name of her husband, and paid the principal and interest for 48 months from February 25, 201 to January 25, 2015.

However, in fact, the defendant purchased the above vehicle and disposed of it without the idea of actual operation, and expected to use the sales proceeds as personal living expenses, etc., and did not meet the basic living expenses every month with the monthly income of the defendant and her husband. Therefore, the defendant did not have any intention or ability to repay the above loan at the time.

Around January 14, 2011, the Defendant, by deceiving the above G, had the victim company transfer KRW 30 million from the victim company to the Korean Standards CC Bank account (Account Number:H) in the name of the owner of the vehicle.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused;

1. Statement to I;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to file a complaint, applications for loans for purchasing motor vehicles, details of deposits, and reports on investigations;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence [Scope of Recommendation] In the case where a person commits a deceitful act by willful negligence (special mitigation) in the reduction area of types 1 (less than KRW 100 million) (one month to one year) (special mitigation) or in the case where the degree of deception is weak (the decision of sentence], but the agreement with the victim was not reached, but the intention of deception was relatively weak, but the installment was paid more than eight times, it reflects the mistake, and the same criminal records except for the case where the person was fined once for the same kind of crime.