A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. The victim B-related relationship;

A. On June 30, 201, the Defendant received KRW 3,500,000 from the victim and received money from the victim B in Seopopopo City, and the fact was merely considered to be used as debt repayment, living expenses, etc. even if he received money, and did not intend or have ability to repay the money properly. However, even if he borrowed money from the victim, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “the Defendant shall lend money to the victim in return for the money.” The Defendant received KRW 3,500,000 on the same day from the victim.

B. On July 23, 2011, the Defendant: (a) at the above D store; (b) even if having received bonuses, the Defendant merely thought that it would be used as debt repayment, living expenses, etc.; and (c) even if having borrowed money from the victim, the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to properly repay it; (d) the Defendant made a false representation to the effect that “the Defendant would borrow money in return for a bonus received at the time of prosecution,” and (e) obtained KRW 5,000,000 from the victim and acquired it by deception.

C. On June 30, 201, the Defendant: (a) at the foregoing D store; (b) even if having received a priority order, the Defendant did not intend or have the ability to normally pay the next D amount; (c) while joining the fraternity operated by the victim, the Defendant fraudulently received KRW 7,300,000 from the victim and acquired KRW 7,50,000 from the victim around July 31, 201, and around August 31, 201.

2. On July 11, 201, the Defendant involved in the victim E’s fraud refers to the victim E’s house located in Seopopo City F, Seopo City F, and the fact that even if the Defendant was paid bonuses, it was merely thought to use them as debt repayment, living expenses, etc., and did not have the intent or ability to properly repay the amount even if he borrowed money from the victim, but it was false to the effect that “the victim was paid a bonus when he was paid a bonus” to the victim, and that it was 1,50,000 won on the same day from the victim.