2. Where the defendant does not pay the above fine; 50.

On December 7, 2009, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant shall pay the card price to the victim C by phoneing to the victim at an influent place,” and that “the Defendant shall immediately lend money to the victim.”

However, at the time of 2005, the Defendant was unable to pay the principal and interest of KRW 50,000,000 borrowed from the victim, and even if a factory operated was provisionally seized, there was no intention or ability to pay the principal and interest.

The Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, received KRW 3 million from the victim to the Busan Bank account in the name of D on the same day, and received KRW 500,000 from the victim to the Busan Bank account in the same manner, and received KRW 500,000 on March 12, 2010, and KRW 1,000,000 from March 15, 2010 to the Agricultural Cooperative account in the name of E, and received KRW 4.5 million in total.

Summary of Evidence

1. Second prosecutor's protocol of examination of the accused (including substitute part);

2. Second police suspect interrogation protocol against the accused (including substitute part);

3. Statement to C by the police;

4. Each investigation report (to attach 4.5 million won as raw materials lent on December 3, 2009 and to listen to the suspect A's telephone statement).

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

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

2. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse.

3. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.