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

1. On September 17, 2013, the defrauded of the borrowed money: (a) the Defendant, despite having no intent or ability to repay the borrowed money from the victim even if he/she borrowed money from the victim; (b) made a false statement that “it is necessary to pay the borrowed money if he/she borrowed KRW 1.6 million; (c) he/she received the remittance from the victim of the borrowed money of KRW 1.6 million on the same day; and (d) received the victim’s total sum of KRW 1,3960,00 from the victim nine times from the date to May 1, 2014; and (e) obtained the victim’s total sum of KRW 1,396,00 from the victim as shown in attached Table 1.

2. On February 6, 2014, the Defendant: (a) at the office of the victim located in Gwangju-gu, Gwangju-gu; (b) even if the Defendant borrowed a credit card, he/she did not have the intent and ability to repay the price; (c) the Defendant made a false statement to the victim that “if the credit card is in need of the present credit card, he/she will use it and pay the price if he/she borrowed the current credit card”; and (d) he/she obtained a new credit card in the name of the victim E from the victim on the same page from the victim on February 6, 2014; and (e) used the credit card in paying the oil amount of KRW 50,00 from the Friju station by April 23, 2014; and (e) obtained a pecuniary benefit equivalent to the said amount by failing to use the credit card in total 49 times, as shown in the attached Table 2 of Crime List.

3. On May 1, 2014, the Defendant was under investigation of illegal loan brokerage business, and there was no intention to return a vehicle from the victim even if he borrowed the vehicle from the victim, and even if he was planned to offer the said vehicle as security and borrow money, the Defendant would use the vehicle and return it to the victim if he borrowed the vehicle at the victim’s office. In other words, the Defendant was holding the GNS car owned by the Defendant, Inc., a company from the victim on the spot.