However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Attached Form

The same shall apply to the facts charged.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness B and C;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of suspects of D;

1. Each police statement protocol with respect to C and B;

1. The defendant asserts that since the amount equivalent to the investment is used as expected by the victim due to spending more than the investment amount in the case of patent transaction contract, conversion bond acceptance contract, transaction details by account, etc., all corporate matters to be registered, written certificates, management contracts, investigation reports (the result of search warrant reply), account transaction details, etc., investigation report (the location of damage), account transaction details, etc., and investigation report (the details of use of KRW 400 million remitted to E) / (the defendant stated that since E, a parent company before and after the victim's investment, used the amount equivalent to the investment amount as expected by the victim, E, a subsidiary company, used the amount equivalent to the investment amount, such as the extension of factory construction and establishment of the production automation system of F, a subsidiary company, the subsidiary company, it cannot be said that the parent company made advance payment on behalf of the subsidiary company, and it did not borrow the amount actually, the subsidiary company

However, according to the contract to underwrite convertible bonds with the victim, 400 million won invested by the victim shall be used for the purpose of facility investment and driving funds of the subsidiary company each for each purpose, and it shall not be used for the purpose of returning existing investment funds or borrowed funds.

Even if the parent company paid the extended construction cost, etc. to be paid by the subsidiary prior to the victim's investment, it cannot be deemed that the parent company paid the extended construction cost, etc. to be paid by the former in lieu of the former in exchange for the former in repayment of the existing debt. This constitutes the return of the existing loan amount prohibited under the contract with the victim.

Moreover, even if the defendant paid 200 million won after the investment, the cost of the investment is 8,400 won.