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

1. On July 12, 2016, Defendant A of Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government stated that “A” with the victim’s operation D of the Victim C in Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, “A need to engage in a business with a large amount of error. If a person lends money, he/she will repay the victim with the principal and interest with three copies of interest in a few months.”

However, in fact, the defendant did not think that he would use the money borrowed from the victim to pay his debt or pay his credit, but he did not think that he would invest in the defendant's business. In addition, the amount equivalent to 515 million won at the time, the financial institution's debt, 37 million won, and even if he borrowed money from the victim due to the failure of the business, he did not have any intent or ability to pay it.

The Defendant received KRW 20 million from the victim to the corporate bank passbook under the name of the Defendant from January 25, 2017 on the same day as the loan money, and received KRW 70,000,000 from the time to January 25, 2017 as the loan money in the same manner, and was issued as the corporate bank passbook under the name of the Defendant, as shown in the list of crimes in the attached Table.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

2. On February 12, 2016, the Defendant loaned money to the victim E at a non-permanent place on or around February 12, 2016, the Defendant called “to repay the amount of money to the victim E” on or around April 12, 2016, and even around April 8, 2016, the Defendant loaned money to the victim while making the same speech.

However, at the time, the Defendant had been liable for the debt amounting to KRW 515 million, financial institution’s debt amounting to KRW 37 million, and had been liable for the repayment of the debt amount. Since the money borrowed from the victim was intended to use it in repayment of the existing debt amount, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay the debt even if he borrowed money from the victim.

The defendant deceivings the victim and is under his control.