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

1. The Defendant at the “D” restaurant located in Pyeongtaek-si C on June 2016, the victim E is the grandchildren of the F operator, and there are many property received.

At present, money is lent to gambling and interest is paid.

Since the payment of interest at 10% is paid with interest, the above money is called as "a repayment after lending it to gambling."

However, the Defendant had a debt equivalent to approximately KRW 42.5 million, and there was no intention or ability to repay the said money even if he/she borrowed money from the damaged party due to no particular profit or property.

Nevertheless, on June 30, 2016, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim as above; (b) received cash 1.8 million won in the name of the loan from the victim in Pyeongtaek-si-si in the Defendant’s residence; (c) around the same day from July 14, 2016, from the victim; and (d) received KRW 19.1 million in total at five times in the same manner from the time to July 14, 2016.

2. The Defendant, like Paragraph 1, received money from the injured party after receiving the money from the injured party, and caused the injured party to be urged to pay the money. On July 15, 2016, the Defendant stated that “The Defendant, “The Defendant engaged in the same singing together, used the money transferred to the Plaintiff as the money invested in the singing room, and repaid the money in the singing room.” This stated that “The Defendant would lend additional money to the injured party.”

However, the Defendant did not have the ability to sing, and all the money already received from the injured party was used in gambling or lent to the injured party at the gambling, so there was no intention and ability to repay the money received from the injured party in singing.

The defendant deceivings the victim as above, and is the victim from the damage, Pyeongtaek-si on July 21, 2016.