On July 11, 2018, the Defendant was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment with prison labor for special injury, etc. in the Daejeon District Court Hongsung Branch on July 11, 2018 and is currently pending in the appellate trial.

The defendant is a foreigner of Chinese nationality.

On December 8, 2017, the Defendant, at the “C” office located in Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, and at the “C” office located in Suwon-si, the Defendant changed the name of the lending contracting party to obtain a loan from the victim D so that he can purchase a vehicle under the name of a foreigner.The installment payment will be made without the mold.

“A false representation was made.”

However, in fact, the defendant did not have an intention or ability to pay installments normally even if he received a loan under the name of the victim, because the monthly average income does not exceed KRW 600,000,000, while working at the construction site.

The Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim as above; (b) had the victim take out a loan of KRW 13,300,000 from E in the middle and the commercial office for the said day; and (c) had the victim buy the FIstren vehicle; and (d) received the said vehicle from the said office.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Notice of complaint, certificate of transfer of motor vehicle, performance and condition inspection of used motor vehicles, notification of violations, and imposition of fines for negligence, guidance on details and payment method of local taxes in arrears, details of deposit transactions, and inspection of the motor vehicle registration ledger;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes for investigation reporting;

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

1. The defendant and his defense counsel's argument regarding the defendant of the choice of imprisonment with prison labor and the defense counsel's argument that "no one asked the victim to substitute the name of the lending contractor while paying the installment payment, and only one failed to pay the installment after being aware of the fact of the installment contract, but there is no day to do so." Thus, the defendant and the defense counsel's argument that the contract was chosen to be