beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.
However, 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. Around July 21, 2008, the Defendant committed the crime against the victim B calls to the victim B, a neighboring resident, who had been aware of in a usual sense at the Defendant’s residence located in Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Nowon-gu, Seoul, Seoul, by phoneing to the victim B, who was a neighboring resident of the building D, and there was a lot of benefit from the purchase of these vehicles at once. When the vehicle borrowed money, the vehicle would pay the money immediately as it sold.
However, in fact, the defendant did not use the money borrowed from the victim as the purchase price of the vehicle, but was thought to use it as the personal debt repayment and living expenses, so even if he borrowed money from the victim, he did not have the intention or ability to pay the borrowed money to the victim with the proceeds of the sale.
Around March 3, 2009, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, received the sum of KRW 30 million from the victim to the F bank account (number G) in the name of the Defendant on the same day from the victim, KRW 20 million,000,000,000,000,000 to the K Bank account (number: J) in the name of the Defendant’s husband H on March 3, 2009, and around March 16, 201, to the K Bank account (number: L) in the above H’s name.
2. On January 25, 201, the Defendant committed the crime against the victim M by phoneing to the victim M who is a neighboring resident, who had been aware of in a usual sense at the Defendant’s residence as stated in the foregoing Paragraph 1, and saying, “E is an Ethr and Ethr is used, and Ethr is Ethr is used to buy and sell the vehicle, and if you lend money, the vehicle will pay the money immediately as it sells.”
However, in fact, the defendant did not use the money borrowed from the victim as the purchase price of the vehicle, but was thought to use it as the personal debt repayment and living expenses, so even if he borrowed money from the victim, he did not have the intention or ability to pay the borrowed money to the victim with the proceeds of the sale.
The defendant deceivings the victim as such and belongs to it from the victim.