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

Around November 28, 2011, the Defendant had D make a false statement on the part of the Defendant in Sung-nam-si, Sungnam-si, that “A shall have the right to receive the payment of the money in return. If the Defendant lends KRW 20 million to A the expenses to be incurred in the performance of the right to receive the payment of the money, the Defendant shall pay two copies of the interest that he/she has paid the money up to February 28, 2012. A may pay the money immediately because he/she has already paid and collected the money.”

However, the fact is that the land-to-land F in Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-si, the defendant operated at the time was not a funeral, and there was almost no income. The defendant's debt was 126 million won, and the house in the same Dong G, the only property of the defendant, was owned by four joint owners including the defendant. However, since the mortgage was established, there was no actual property value due to the establishment of the right to collateral security, and the remaining apartment was also established and there was no intention to use not only the value of the property but also the money borrowed from the victim to receive the payment from the victim. Accordingly, there was no intention or ability to pay the money.

Around November 30, 2011, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, received 20 million won from the victim through H as the borrowed money and acquired it by deceiving the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statement to E;

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

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

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