On February 22, 2018, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment with prison labor and a fine of two million won for larceny, etc. in Jinwon District Court Jinwon District Court on March 29, 2018 and the judgment became final and conclusive on March 29, 2018.

On September 15, 2017, the Defendant purchased “C Motor Vehicle Sales Co., Ltd.” in “C Motor Vehicle Sales Co., Ltd.” and loaned KRW 30,000,000 as the vehicle price, and paid KRW 30,000 as the vehicle price, the Defendant would normally repay the principal and interest ( KRW 803,30 per annum) for 48 months at an interest rate of 12.9% per annum, as if he/she is currently engaged in agriculture, and prepared an application for mid-term installment, and submitted the said application and contract to Athath Capital Co., Ltd. through E of the said trading company.

However, the defendant did not engage in agriculture at the time, and even if he purchased a vehicle with a loan from the injured party, he did not have the intention or ability to repay the loan, because the government was living with the disabled subsidy of 50,000 won in the absence of property under the name of the defendant and there was no particular income.

As above, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received a loan of KRW 30,000,000 from the injured party on the same day, and acquired pecuniary benefits equivalent to the same amount.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A letter of apology of a secondhand part of the contract to be Oralized;

1. Original Register of Automobile Registration;

1. Account transactions;

1. Previous convictions: Inquiries about criminal history and the application of Acts and subordinate statutes of investigation reports;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 347 of the choice of punishment;

1. The latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Code to treat concurrent crimes: (a) considering the recommended sentencing guidelines for the reasons for sentencing of Article 39(1) of the Criminal Code, the damage amount of this case was approximately KRW 30,000,000; and (b) if a mortgage was established on a motor vehicle, some damage would have been likely to be recovered if the motor vehicle did not go without any specific reason; and (c) other arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, developments, means and results of this case, and the circumstances after the crime.