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

The Defendant is the representative director of the “E” corporation located in the business incubator of D University in Yeonsu-gu Incheon Metropolitan City.

On June 28, 2012, the Defendant: (a) purchased one motor vehicle in the form of “a vehicle through a discount loan; (b) made a false statement that “a vehicle will be purchased in good faith for 36 months; (c) paid in installments for 25 million won for 36 months; and (d) written the same purport in the “Agreement on the Settlement and Loan” of the Victim’s Social Co., Ltd., Ltd., which had been kept at the same place.

However, in fact, even if the Defendant borrowed KRW 25 million from the victim and paid the price for the said car, the Defendant did not have a monthly wage for employees at that time, and there was no intention or ability to pay the principal and interest of the loan at that time because the said car was provided as security to F. Therefore, there was no intention or ability to pay it at that time.

The Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, had the victim pay a loan of KRW 25 million to the seller of the said car, thereby avoiding the payment of KRW 25 million, thereby acquiring property benefits equivalent to the said amount.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. G statements;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning a copy of a mid-to-medium agreement and a detailed statement of transactions (for certificates of debt balance);

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 347 of the Election of Imprisonment;

2. Reasons for sentencing [the range of recommending sentence] under Article 62(1)(C) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence, taking into account the following factors: (a) the basic area (6 to 100,000 won or less) of category 1 (6) of the Criminal Act (the decision of sentencing) (6 to 100,000 won) (the decision of sentencing] reflects the defendant’s fault depth; (b) the defendant deposited 3.8 million won for the recovery of damage; and (c