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

On August 1, 2012, the Defendant stated that “E” clothes store operated by the victim C in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D1stro, “E”, the Defendant paid the victim the interest of KRW 300,000 won per month on the loan of money and borrowed the money to repay the principal within the two months.”

However, the Defendant did not have any intention or ability to repay the principal and interest of other overdue loans even if he borrowed money from the victim with bad credit standing at the time.

The Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 16 million on the same day from the victim, and received KRW 13.5 million on the following day, respectively, and received KRW 29.5 million in total.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on transactions in letters and passbooks attached to a complaint;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the grounds that the defendant is against himself and there is no particular criminal

1. Social service order under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 32 (1) and (2), and 25 (3) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Improvement of Lawsuit, etc. of Application for Compensation (the scope of liability for compensation is not clear, and it is not reasonable to issue an order for compensation in the criminal procedure of this case);