When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

The Defendant is a person who has operated a “D” restaurant in the name of “D” under the 202 Building C in the eternic City.

In order to obtain a loan for business operation funds, the Defendant decided to transfer KRW 39 million out of the lease bond bonds of the above restaurant KRW 50 million to the victim future 2 Savings Bank, Inc., and borrowed KRW 30 million from the victim on October 15, 2010 at an annual interest rate of 23.725% from the victim on October 15, 201.

However, the Defendant was unable to repay the loan normally with the expiration of the rent deposit due to the impossibility of operating the above restaurant at the time, and eventually, the Defendant would transfer the loan to the security for the loan even though the lease deposit was fully extinguished.

The money was acquired by borrowing 30 million won from the damaged party.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement of the E police statement;

1. Reporting on investigation (verification of lease deposit);

1. The president of a general loan, a credit transaction agreement, or a lease contract which is concluded by the defendant and the defense counsel, and the defendant and the defense counsel did not recognize the transfer of the lease deposit claims to secure the obligation of the loan at the time, and there is no fact of deceiving the victim and there was no intention to commit fraud;

However, in light of the following circumstances, the Defendant, at the time of the instant loan, voluntarily prepared a certificate of credit transfer with the content of KRW 39 million, out of KRW 50 million, and then delivered the certificate of credit transfer and a copy of the lease contract to the employees of the said bank. However, the Defendant’s assertion that, at the time of the instant loan, the Defendant’s claim for the lease deposit against the lessorF was already extinguished due to the delayed payment of rent, and that the Defendant’s claim that, even if having written and issued the certificate of credit transfer was not aware of the fact of credit transfer was in violation of common sense and rule of law.