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

1. Around March 2013, the Defendant, along with C, acquired Emart in Seoul Special Metropolitan City Nowon-gu, from KRW 1.1 billion and intended to operate it as C and Dong business. Of the acquisition price of Emart, the Defendant borrowed money from the victim F (or 44 years of age) to use it for the payment of deposited rent, etc.

Therefore, around March 25, 2013, C concluded a sales contract with the victim F to purchase KRW 1,50,000,000 from the Dong office located in the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government as of March 25, 2013, stating that “When the victim F was lent KRW 1,474,00,000,000 to the Defendant as operating funds, C would pay KRW 200,000,000 to the Defendant.” As security for the above borrowed money, the Defendant concluded a sales contract to purchase KRW 1,474,00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 won.”

However, in fact, the Defendant and C concluded an unreasonable contract to pay KRW 1.1 billion of the acquisition price from the operating profit of the Marart, as there was no surplus other than the down payment of KRW 20 million, and concluded a contract to pay the acquisition price from the profits of the Marart. 1, 200. Furthermore, the Defendant and C concluded a sales contract in the form of money to borrow money from the victim, and did not think of the actual purchase of the said land. Thus, the Defendant and C did not have any intent or ability to repay the loan even if they borrowed money from the victim.

In collusion with the Defendant, the Defendant and C received KRW 1,50,000 from March 25, 2013 to March 28, 2013, a transfer of KRW 1,50,000 from the account in the name of C, under the pretext of borrowing money from the victim.

2. The Defendant prepared a notarial deed of KRW 200 million on October 4, 2013 by failing to repay KRW 150,000,000 borrowed from the above victim on the same date as the above paragraph 1 above.