In the case of fraud against the victim C, the defendant is punished by imprisonment for four months, and fraud against the victim D.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant 2, “2015 Highest 2333, Defendant 3 was an EF car operator located in the Gu Government-Si, and the victim C was a middle class seller in the middle class sales, and the Defendant and the victim became aware of in the course of conducting the business.

On February 24, 2014, the Defendant borrowed 5 million won as “the money is urgently needed for business.” On February 24, 2014, the Defendant either introduced the sale and purchase of used cars for the forum, or received payment within three months.

“A total of KRW 29,131,000,000 was paid from the time when the injured party received five million won from the Defendant’s account to October 2 of the same year, as shown in the list of crimes in the attached Table, from October 2 of the same year.

However, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay the interest, even if the Defendant was liable for damages to several loan companies at the time, and the interest in arrears was due to the failure to pay the interest, and the Defendant borrowed the interest from the damaged party in excess of five million won.

As a result, the defendant deceivings the victim and received property as shown in the list of crimes.

The Defendant, on September 16, 2014, was sentenced to six months of imprisonment with prison labor for embezzlement and one year of suspended execution on September 24, 2014, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on September 24, 2014.

[2] The Defendant: (a) at the J real estate brokerage office located in Dongducheon-si I around July 2012, 2012, the Defendant provided the victim D with a claim to return the lease deposit equivalent to KRW 45 million to his house he leased by the Defendant; and (b) even if the victim makes a sublease on deposit, the Defendant shall not cause damage by providing the claim to return the lease deposit equivalent to KRW 45 million as security.

“A false statement was made to the effect that it was “.”

However, in fact, even if the Defendant transferred the right to refund the above lease deposit to the above sub-permanent housing to the Seoyang Saemaeul Undong-dong 226 on October 6, 201, and received money from the damaged party as the deposit money, he/she shall provide the above lease deposit repayment claim as security even if he/she received money from the damaged party.