The defendant is a person who has no fixed occupation.

On October 19, 2010, the Defendant stated that, at Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Cda, the victim D referred to as “a person who is well aware of the primary financial right is responsible for and will receive a loan of 400 million won. However, if the Defendant intends to obtain a loan, 25 million won is necessary under the pretext of school expenses, and it is intended to receive a loan within two to three months without a mold.”

However, the defendant did not have the intention or ability to allow the victim to get a loan.

The Defendant, as above, was accused by the victim, was remitted 25 million won to the Defendant’s corporate bank account.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on each legal statement of D and E;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime;

1. The reason for sentencing of the sentence of selective imprisonment [the scope of the sentence of recommendation] from January to one year (the area of mitigation of types of fraud and fraud 1] [the sentence] crime of this case is deemed to have obtained money by deceit as if it could receive money from the victim, and the crime of this case is not likely to be committed.

The defendant has served two times of probation and six times of fine due to the same type of fraud, etc.

However, the fact that the defendant paid part of the damage amount to the victim and agreed shall be considered in favor of the victim.

In addition, comprehensively taking into account all the sentencing conditions shown in the instant case, such as the character, conduct, environment, and circumstances after the commission of the crime, the sentence is determined as ordered.