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

In fact, the Defendant, with the position of the Vice-Chairperson of D Co., Ltd. around September 2007, received a certain monthly wage since it was a kind of order brokerage for construction works and received fees, etc. in return for orders for construction works, and did not receive a fixed monthly wage since it was not a regular employee. Around August 2008, a provisional attachment of an amount equivalent to KRW 800 million was established on an apartment owned by the Defendant and registered as a bad credit holder due to the guaranteed liability of an amount equivalent to KRW 1.6 billion borne by the Defendant before the Gangdong-gu Seoul E Hospital Administrative Director, and even if he borrowed money from the victim F, even though he did not have the intent or ability to properly repay money, the Defendant, at the Gangnam-gu G G Getype, Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Council around September 2007, notwithstanding that he did not have an intention or ability to repay money from the victim F, “I want to start the business,” and there was a shortage of money from 100,000 won,00 won,0000 won,000 won,00.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of witness F;

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

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint;

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

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. According to the reasoning of the conviction of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act and the records of the reason for sentencing, it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant acquired the sum of 90,40,000 won from the victim as stated in the facts of the crime even though the defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay.