Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On July 20, 2009, the Defendant called the victim C at a place where it is not known to the Defendant on July 20, 2009, and provided the victim C with a "as soon as the Defendant was faced with a situation where the money is urgently needed, it would be immediately repaid."

“The phrase “ was false.”

However, the fact is that the business operated by the defendant is so poor that it has been urged by other creditors to pay the debt, and the amount borrowed from the injured party has also been subject to pressure to pay the debt to other creditors to the extent that it should be appropriated for the repayment of the debt to other creditors, so even if the injured party borrows money, there was no intention or ability to pay it.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, as seen above, received 20 million won from the injured party to the new bank account in the name of the Defendant from the injured party, and acquired it by fraud.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement No. C made to the defendant during the police interrogation protocol (two times);

1. The statement to the effect that, among the protocol of suspect interrogation of the defendant against the defendant (the first time) around March 2009, the defendant had a debt of KRW 200 million with respect to the Credit Guarantee Fund, a new bank, and D, etc. on or around March 2, 2009, and that on March 2, 2009, the defendant used the whole amount of KRW 20 million borrowed from the injured party for debt repayment, etc. to other creditors.

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. Protocol of compromise between the Seoul Southern District Court and each letter;

1. Report on investigation (Analysis of details of use of criminal suspect's damage amount);

1. The Seoul Central District Court Decision 2014 53038 Decided the case [In light of various circumstances, such as the Defendant’s obligation relationship prior to borrowing of money, the details of repayment after borrowing money, and the circumstances leading up to the Defendant’s personal rehabilitation procedure, there was a criminal intent to obtain the Defendant by deception, which is not negligent, in light of the following:

【Recognition】

Application of Statutes

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense;

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment (a settlement that the Defendant repaid the victim KRW 5 million on or around December 30, 2010, and that on December 30, 2013, the court decided to repay the total amount of KRW 17 million.