On May 13, 2017, the Defendant called “A office located in Daegu-gun District Court Decision 2017,” “A office phone called to the victim D and made it difficult to repay the money borrowed by a credit business entity. It is difficult for a savings bank to obtain a loan due to low credit rating to ask the loan broker to ask the loan broker for the loan and to deliver the personal information with high credit rating to the loan broker. If a bank delivers the loan broker’s personal information with a high credit rating, it would receive a loan under its name and the lender for the loan would also be within the scope of four, and the contact from the loan broker would cause any damage.” The Defendant sent the personal information from the loan broker. It would be free to deliver the money deposited in the passbook.”

However, in fact, the defendant thought that he would receive a loan under the name of the victim, not the name of the defendant, and even if he received a loan, he was unable to make a living of the interest on the loan at a monthly rate, and thus, he did not have the intention or ability to repay the

Around May 16, 2017, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim; (b) let the victim deliver a copy of the victim’s authorized certificate and identification card to E; (c) obtained a loan of KRW 20 million from the F Bank; (d) KRW 18 million from the G Bank; and (e) KRW 15 million from the H Bank; and (e) obtained a loan of KRW 53 million from the H Bank on May 17, 2017; and (e) obtained a remittance of KRW 10 million from the Defendant’s I Bank to the Defendant’s I Bank account on May 17, 2017; and (e) obtained a remittance of KRW 43 million from the same account on May 18, 2017.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of D police statement;

1. A written application for a loan from the F Bank, details of transfer, content of conversation, recording;

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

1. Relevant Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting the crime, Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act selection of the penalty, and reasons

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: One month to ten years of imprisonment;

2. The scope of recommendations according to the sentencing guidelines [the determination of types] shall be limited to fraud (the type 1] below 100 million won.