A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

On January 13, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment for fraud at the Seoul Central District Court, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on August 7, 2015, and was living together with the victim C (year 42) and until October 2010.

1. On April 14, 2011, in the vicinity of the subway Station located in Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on or around April 14, 2011, the Defendant was transferred KRW 2 million to the national bank account in the name of the Defendant’s living under the name of the Defendant’s borrowing of money from the Defendant’s personal debt amounting to KRW 30 million, without any intent or ability to repay the money, and even if the Defendant was to use the money borrowed from the victim for the repayment of his personal debt, the Defendant was believed to use the money borrowed from the victim for the repayment of the Defendant’s personal debt, on the same day.

2. On May 2, 2011, the Defendant was transferred from May 2, 201, to the bank account in the name of the Defendant’s living in the name of a bank account in the name of the Defendant, even if he/she received money from the victim as a stock investment because he/she had a considerable financial power or did not make an investment in stocks at the time, and even if he/she received money from the victim as a stock investment, he/she did not have an intent or ability to guarantee the principal and profit, etc. by using the money as a stock investment through the Defendant’s appearance, and “I may obtain profits at least two times as principal and profit if he/she received money from the Defendant’s living in the name of a bank account in the name of the Defendant’s living in the name of a bank as a stock investment.”

3. On July 8, 2011, the Defendant was guilty of fraud, under the pretext of a loan in order to secure a street store on July 8, 201, at the place of payment around July 7, 2011, under such circumstances as the Defendant was under economic difficulty as provided in paragraph 1 at the time.