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

On October 24, 2019, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim B, a person in charge of credit loans, claiming a “workplace credit loan” by putting a phone to the victim B, and offered an explanation from the said person in charge of the loan to the effect that “it is impossible to grant a loan at the same time as another person in charge of the loan with another person in charge of the loan.”

However, at the time, the Defendant had already been provided with loans worth KRW 200 million from nine financial companies. In order to prevent the occurrence of overdue interest, the Defendant sought to pay the existing loans with concurrent loans worth KRW 172 million on the same day from eight financial companies including the victim, and had no economic ability to pay the principal and interest even if he/she received the loans from the victim.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving a person in charge of loans from the victim company, entered into a credit transaction agreement with the said person in charge of loans, and acquired money by remitting KRW 30 million to the new bank account under the name of the Defendant with the said person in charge of loans, KRW 17.9% per annum, and approximately KRW 752,444 won per month for 60 months in the equal manner of repayment of principal and interest.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement of the police statement regarding C;

1. A complaint;

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes, such as a credit transaction agreement;

1. Relevant Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of criminal punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act ( considered as the first offender) of the suspended execution;

1. Determination on the defendant's assertion of Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act

1. The alleged defendant and his defense counsel asserted that at the time of the crime of this case, at the time of the crime of this case, the defendant tried to reduce the interest rate by lowering the interest rate as a low interest rate, and to fully repay the principal and interest of his obligation to financial institutions including the victim. Since he had the ability to repay, he did not have the intention of defraudation.

2. Determination

(a) deception, which is a requirement for fraud, is widely proprietary;