When the Defendant informed the victim B of the fact that it is impossible for the victim B to provide additional loans as a security despite the victim B’s debt to the victim C, the Defendant attempted to defraud the victim by deceiving the victims to the effect that the victim B would be able to obtain additional loans under the victim B’s name.

1. On March 2017, the Defendant against the victim B was at the Defendant’s office located in the Daegu Suwon-gu D (U.S.) (hereinafter “B”) around the end of March 2017, the Defendant would be able to loan KRW 100 million additionally from F by receiving the Defendant’s employees who have been well aware of the inside E and F, with an appraisal value of two stores with the said employees and raising the appraisal value of the two stores.

As such, the phrase “afford the staff to increase.”

However, in fact, the defendant did not have any employee in E and F, and he thought that he would use the money received from the injured party individually, so that he did not have any intention or ability to allow the injured party to receive the loan.

The Defendant deceivings the victim as above and transferred KRW 2 million to the F account in the name of the Defendant on April 3, 2017 from the victim.

2. The Defendant, against the victim C, by deceiving the victim in the same manner at the same time, time, and place as in the preceding paragraph, and received KRW 4 million from the victim, to the F bank account in the name of the Defendant on April 5, 2017, KRW 1.5 million from April 10, 2017, to the H bank account in the name of the Defendant’s wife G, and KRW 2 million from April 17, 2017, respectively.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement protocol against B and C;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Selection of each sentence of imprisonment;

1. The period during which the defendant for reasons of sentencing under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Concurrent Crimes is suspended from execution for the same crime (the defendant on January 12, 2016).