However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. Around January 2014, the Defendant against the victim C expressed that “A victim C, working at the E Hospital office located in D at a permanent residence, has a appearance of imprisonment with labor, and the mother is working for the Gambling market. The investment would result in a large amount of profits. (b) investment would also have been made; (c) every 10 days, 10% of the principal amount is paid as profit. If there is a good opportunity, an investment would be made.”

However, from March 2014, there was no profit-making profit from F, the Defendant was unable to pay a normal profit. As such, there was a situation in which the Defendant was unable to pay the investment money received from the victim, G, and H, a working partner, to return to F without paying the investment money, and some of the investment money received from the victim, G, and H was used for personal purposes, such as the payment of the Defendant’s insurance premium and the repayment of debt, and the Defendant did not have an intent or ability to pay the principal as agreed upon even if he received the investment money from the victim.

Accordingly, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received 4 million won from the victim to the corporate bank account in the name of the Defendant on May 23, 2014, and transferred 4.8 million won to the agricultural bank account in the name of the Defendant on June 13, 2014, and received 8.8 million won in total from the victim twice.

2. On March 7, 2014, at the same place as in paragraph (1) of the same Article, the criminal defendant against the victim G said that “a number of profits would have been made if he/she makes an investment to his/her own child. It would be good that he/she has made an investment. It would also have made an investment. For every 10 days, 10% of the principal amount would have been paid as profit. If there is a good opportunity, an investment would be made.”

However, for the same reason as paragraph (1), the defendant has invested money from the victim.