A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

1. On October 20, 2009, the Defendant stated that “A victim D’s house located in Yeongsan-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, would lend money to another person and receive interest from the victim, and the principal will be repaid until April 20, 2010.”

However, at the time of the fact, the Defendant, while engaging in the business of visiting and selling cosmetics, did not collect the sale proceeds and did not pay the proceeds to the head office in order to prevent the payment of the debt. As such, even if he/she borrowed the proceeds from the damaged party, he/she was willing to use the loan business and pay personal debts, such as credit card payments. Even if he/she borrowed the proceeds from the borrowed money temporarily, he/she was able to pay only the interest agreed upon to by the injured party and did not have any intent or ability to pay the principal.

Nevertheless, the Defendant was granted three million won as the borrowed money from the injured party by deceiving the injured party by making such a false statement as above, and was given three million won around November 26 of the same year and five million won around December 29 of the same year, respectively.

2. On November 21, 2012, the Defendant told the victim D’s house located in Full-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Busan Special Metropolitan City, that “The husband in the Republic of Korea needs to pay money to a certified broker’s office, opening an office with a loan from money, and complete payment with a loan from an alley commercial zone.”

However, in fact, the Defendant continued to pay the debt as stated in the above Paragraph 1, and was thought to have been used first for the repayment of other debt even after receiving a loan from a business district for a set of 100 million won at the time. Therefore, even if the Defendant borrowed money from the damaged party, only the agreed interest could have been repaid, and there was no intention or ability to pay the principal.

Nevertheless, the defendant knews the victim by making such a false statement, and he was given 15 million won as the borrowed money from the victim.

3. The Defendant: (a) around February 201, 201.