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

From the beginning of 2015, the Defendant had to pay a large amount of debt incurred in performing financial transactions with J, K, etc. at high interest rates equivalent to KRW 10 to KRW 20,000 per month. Since April 2016, the Defendant received cash services equivalent to KRW 3 million or KRW 5,100,000 per month and paid interest, and thus, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to pay a certain amount of debt even with others even if she borrowed money.

Nevertheless, the defendant had attempted to borrow money to the neighboring people including victims I and L, etc., so that they could be able to repay the principal and interest, including interest at high interest rates, by deceiving them as if there are many people who want to lend money to them.

1. Fraud against the victim I (No. 2017 type No. 20010) made a false statement to the effect that “A victim I will receive payment without any molding up to April 30, 2018 with interest on two loans of KRW 30 million on July 31, 2017 at the Defendant’s home parking lot located in Yasan-si, YA.”

However, even if the defendant borrowed money from the injured party, the defendant did not have the intent or ability to repay it.

Nevertheless, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim as above and receiving KRW 30 million from the victim as the borrowed money; (b) and (c) from around that time to August 31, 2017, the Defendant received a total of KRW 85 million from around four times, such as the [Attachment 1] list.

2. Fraud against the victim L (2017 type No. 20177) Defendant sent Kakao Stockholm messages at around October 11, 2016 at non-permanent places.

In other words, the victim provided that "to pay the interest of 10% per month from the lending of money, and to lend money from the neighboring people to make an investment."

However, even if the defendant borrowed money from the injured party, the defendant did not have the intent or ability to repay it.

Nevertheless, the defendant deceivings the victim as above.