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

From January 2016, the Defendant: (a) from around 201 to around 2016, the Defendant: (b) had not received a certain amount of income from the Defendant; (c) had been thought to use the money for the cost of living; and (d) had no intent or ability to repay the money borrowed from the victim; and (d) on March 8, 2016, the Defendant received a total of KRW 1,650,000 from the Defendant’s bank account (E) in the name of C (E) in the name of the Defendant from around June 2016 to January 24, 2017, the Defendant received KRW 1,650,000 from the victim in total on three occasions, as indicated in the attached list of crimes (E).

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each protocol of the police interrogation of the accused (including cross-examination);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statement No. B

1. Relevant Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Determination of punishment as ordered by taking full account of the following factors: (a) scale of damage caused by sentencing, degree of damage recovery (in the instant criminal procedure as the defendant deposited KRW 10 million for the victim), criminal records, confessions and reflects in depth; and (b) Defendant’s age, environment, family relationship, motive leading up to the crime, motive leading up to the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc.; and (c) the sentencing conditions specified in the records and arguments of the instant case, including the following circumstances: