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

On December 11, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Military Service Act at the Suwon District Court on August 201, and the judgment became final and conclusive on December 19, 2013.

On October 2013, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim B, stating that “The Defendant would temporarily pay 5% interest rate until October 25, 2014, to the victim B, in an influent restaurant in the return fluent city to the police officer.” The Defendant borrowed 46 million won as business funds.

However, at the time, the Defendant had already borne the debt of KRW 20 million at the time, and was planned to use most of the debt borrowed from the victim as repayment of the previous debt and living expenses, etc., not for the news reporting business, and the news reporting business in which the Defendant participated was merely a monthly sales amount of KRW 2.4 million and did not have any intent or ability to repay the above money within the period of promise.

As above, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received from the victim a remittance of KRW 46 million from October 25, 2013 to the national bank account (C) in the name of the Defendant.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement concerning B;

1. A loan certificate and a detailed statement of banking transactions (22 pages);

1. Previous records of judgment: Application of criminal records, inquiry reports and investigation reports, and statutes;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 347 (1) of the Election of Imprisonment or Imprisonment;

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Code of the Probation and Social Service Order (applicable to sentencing guidelines because it falls under a short sentence) is that the defendant has not yet agreed with the victim, but has completed public interest service, and that there is no previous difference, and that the final judgment and the criminal facts of this case were punished in relation to concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Code.