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

On January 208, the Defendant stated that “A victim E, who was aware of the participation in D’s “D” in Suwon-si, Suwon-si, had to pay the money borrowed from another person,” and who was aware of such participation in D’s private teaching institute. The Defendant stated that “Around January 2, 2008, the Defendant paid the money borrowed from another person.”

In fact, however, there was no intention or ability to repay the money even if the money was borrowed from the injured party, such as that the expenses of KRW 50 million incurred in opening the philosolosolosolosolosolosolosolosophical hall was not repaid.

Accordingly, the Defendant, as seen above, was accused of the victim, and received five million won from the damaged party.

The Defendant, including this, received a total of KRW 42,906,000 from around this time to July 20, 201, as indicated in the list of crimes in attached Table 14 times.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's legal statement (as at the third public trial date);

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each loan receipt, each detailed statement of transaction of ordinary deposits (F) , table of transaction of free savings deposit (E), text message pictures, and card use statement;

1. Relevant Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

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

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Where the scope of the recommended sentence on the sentencing guidelines [the scope of the recommended sentence] general fraud [the scope of the recommended sentence] is reduced area (one month to one year) [the person subject to special mitigation], the penalty of which is not imposed, or damage corresponding to a considerable part is restored;

2. Determination of sentence: (a) the Defendant recognized and reflected the instant crime; (b) the fact that the Defendant agreed with the victim that the Defendant was punished for the same kind of crime under favorable circumstances; and (c) the fact that the Defendant was punished for the same kind of crime under unfavorable circumstances; and (d) other factors such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive and circumstance leading to the instant crime; and (e) the circumstances after the instant crime, etc., the sentence