beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
1. The Defendant, around 14:00 on October 13, 201, at the victim D’s house located in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, “The Defendant shall repay to the Defendant the amount of money up to January 12, 2012 if he/she lends money in the name of payment of acquisition tax, repayment of debts, and living expenses.” In the case where the Defendant is unable to repay money, he/she received KRW 25 million in total from the date on which he/she prepares a authentic deed of a monetary loan agreement on behalf of the Defendant and received KRW 18,5 million from the time he/she reaches the same month.
However, the Defendant had a debt of approximately KRW 30 million at the time, and there was no special property or income, and there was no intention or ability to repay the debt even if he borrowed money from the victim as above, since he did not have to receive KRW 50 million from her husband, and E did not have an intention to repay the debt in lieu of the Defendant where he did not have any intention to do so.
Nevertheless, the Defendant conspired with E and received KRW 25 million from the victim who is affiliated with the victim.
2. The Defendant, at around 15:00 on October 26, 201, at the place specified in paragraph (1) at around 15:00, “A deposit is required to operate the store in Yongsan-gu, Seoul. If the Defendant borrowed KRW 10 million, 1.5 million will be used and repaid for 1.5 days if the Defendant borrowed the loan.” As if the Defendant is unable to repay the money, E created a collateral security under subparagraph 201 of the 2nd class of the 2nd class of the F house in Seo-gu, Incheon, Incheon, which is its own owner, and received a remittance of KRW 10 million from the victim on the same day because a promissory note with a face value of KRW 39 million is issued.
However, since the defendant was in excess of the obligation as stated in Paragraph 1 at the time, even if he borrowed money from the victim, he did not have the intention or ability to repay the money, and E also wishes to pay the money in lieu of the defendant.