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

1. On October 4, 2011, the Defendant concluded on October 4, 2011, that “The funds are needed to operate a cafeteria with a smaller amount of money inside the country” to the victim C at the home of the Defendant located in Nam-gu, Nam-gu, Nam-gu, Seoul on October 4, 201, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim C, stating that “The funds are needed to operate a cafeteria with a smaller amount of money. At present, 30 million won are usheshes up in January 2012. If 20 million won is lent, 2 million won per month interest shall be paid and the amount of the dam shall be repaid on January 10, 2012.”

However, fact was that the Defendant did not pay the price of the card at the time, and was in a bad credit condition from August 201 to August 201, but was in a 20 million won, but the payment was made after two times, but the Defendant’s husband was in a daily-paid household system, but even if the Defendant’s husband’s revenue was in a daily-paid household system, it was difficult to continuously bear the monthly income equivalent to 2 million won per month, and there was no economic circumstance to the extent that it was difficult to pay the monthly income, and even if there was no specific plan for the acquisition and operation of the restaurant, there was no intention or ability to complete payment for the period of payment that was used and promised to use for the operation of the restaurant.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, was given KRW 20 million from the victim, who was in his seat, as a loan from the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

2. On October 21, 2011, the fraud Defendant made a false statement to the victim C, stating, “A person who would pay interest of KRW 10 million,00,000,000,000,000 to the victim and receive KRW 40,000,000 per day for 30 days, if D would have paid to the victim.”

However, in fact, the Defendant did not have any economic condition like the statement in the preceding paragraph, and even if he borrowed money from the victim because there was no special source of income, he did not have any intent or ability to repay the borrowed money in 400,000 won a day as agreed.

Nevertheless, it is not appropriate.