The request of the applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

On June 26, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year on July 4, 2015, and was sentenced to a suspended sentence of six months for habitual gambling in Suwon District Court’s Pyeongtaek District Court’s imprisonment, and became final and conclusive on July 4, 2015.

On September 30, 2013, the Defendant was at the Dong-dong Fire Office located in the Eup located in Pyeongtaek-si, and the victim D was "a plucking or plucking up the lease of apartment houses, but the problem of the revolving the fund has occurred.

It is urgently necessary to lend money, which is short, and will be repaid after one month.

“.....”

However, the defendant had no intention or ability to repay the borrowed money to the victim, even if he borrowed money from the victim, he had the intent to use it for gambling.

Nevertheless, the Defendant received the remittance of KRW 10 million from the victim of the same day as the borrowed money, and received a total of KRW 89 million over five times until October 28 of the same year, including the remittance of KRW 10 million from the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal testimony of witness D;

1. Statement made by the prosecution with regard to D;

1. Account transactions;

1. Investigation report by prosecution (report attached to the credit information of the accused);

1. Previous convictions: Inquiry into criminal history, investigation reports (report on the result of confirmation of the previous convictions of the disposition), and application of statutes of the judgment;

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

1. After Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 39 (1) of the same Act:

1. Reasons for sentencing of Article 32(1)3 and Article 25(3)3 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Lawsuit for Dismissal of Application for Compensation (the applicant for compensation is applying for compensation of KRW 100,000,000 on the basis of the loan certificate stating the amount not repaid as KRW 69,50,000,000 on the basis of loan certificate, and the interest rate of KRW 2% on the basis of loan certificate; however, in this court, it is unreasonable to issue an order for compensation because the scope of liability for compensation is unclear, such as the statement that the amount not repaid is KRW 69,50,000,000 on the ground of

1. The scope of punishment by sentence: Imprisonment for 10 years;