If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

1. On March 9, 2012, the Defendant: “Around March 9, 2012, at the coffee shop near Seocho-gu Seoul Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, the Defendant told the victim D that “If he/she lends a used car, he/she would make a lot of profits from selling it by selling it, he/she would make a reimbursement in the difference after purchasing the vehicle, and after selling it.”

However, even if the Defendant borrowed the above money from the victim, the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to purchase used cars and repay the borrowed money with the proceeds because it did not intend to sell it.

Nevertheless, the defendant deceivings the victim as above and acquired 5 million won as the borrowed money from the new bank account in the name of the defendant E on the same day from the victim.

2. On June 26, 2012, around June 26, 2012, the defrauded provided that “Around June 26, 2012, the Defendant shall repay the victim with interest of 13% per annum if he/she lends the money to the victim in relation to the organization with disabilities.”

However, even if the Defendant borrowed money from the victim, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay the principal and interest.

Nevertheless, the defendant deceivings the victim as above and acquired 10 million won as the borrowed money from the new bank account in the name of the wife E on the same day from the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of witness D;

1. Application for a warrant of search, seizure, and verification (application of financial account trend);

1. Application of the head of a Tong, loan certificate statutes attached to the complaint;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

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

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

1. The defendant and his defense counsel regarding the assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order, and the defendant collectively 1.