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

1. On July 15, 2010, the Defendant called “a loan of KRW 35 million to the maximum prompt repayment line” by phone call to the victim C, who was known of the place, at a place where the location is unknown.

However, in fact, the Defendant did not have any other income than approximately KRW 6.8 million monthly income, and there was a need to pay the Defendant’s debt and treatment expenses with monthly income. Even if the Defendant borrowed money from the victim, it was thought that it was used to prevent the Defendant from returning the existing debt, so there was no ability or intent to repay the money to the victim as soon as possible.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, was issued 20 million won to a new bank account under the name of the Defendant on the same day under the pretext of borrowing money from the victim.

2. On November 13, 2010, the Defendant received KRW 15 million from the victim’s new bank account on the same day as the loan, and received KRW 15 million in total from the victim’s bank account on the same day on the same day as the loan, and received KRW 5 million from the victim on the same day on January 28, 201, inasmuch as the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay money from the victim as described in the preceding paragraph, even if he/she borrowed money from the victim, at a place where the location is unknown, and even if he/she borrowed money from the victim, he/she did not have any intention or ability to repay it soon.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. A copy of the bankbook;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime concerned;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence [the scope of recommending punishment] is the case where the act of deception is committed with willful negligence in the field of special mitigation (one month to one year) (special mitigation) (special mitigation (special mitigation).