A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On December 29, 2014, the Defendant, Jongno-gu Seoul, Jongno-gu, 6, made a mobile Messen and telephone in the East-gu Integrated Market, and the Defendant, “The house owner, raising the house deposit,” to the victim C.

In addition, security deposit is needed to operate the store.

D. The loan will be repaid or changed to the name of the loan in the name of the lending company if the loan is lent to D. 6 months.

And the interest during that period will be paid.

“.......”

However, the defendant was planned to use the above loan as an existing debt repayment, living expenses, etc., and at the time there was a debt of 200 million won or more, and there was no particular revenue or property. Therefore, even if he borrowed money from the victim, he did not have the intent or ability to repay it.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, acquired the victim’s total sum of KRW 25 million on December 29, 2014, KRW 15 million from the victim, KRW 5 million on December 30, 2014, and KRW 25 million on January 5, 2015.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to C;

1. C Complaints;

1. Copies of each loan application;

1. Determination of immunity, creditor list, inquiry of financial transaction details, statement of transaction by account, inquiry of past transaction details, application of statutes on text messages;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment for the crime (elective of imprisonment);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. Crimes committed with the reason of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Code of the Social Service Order using personal trust relationship with the victim is not good.

In addition to the money obtained by deception, the victim has suffered considerable additional damage such as the burden of interest on loans, and this seems to have suffered considerable economic suffering.

Most of the damage have not been recovered.

There is a record of being sentenced to a fine of 700,000 won for fraud in 2014.

However, the crime of this case can be viewed as willful negligence.

The victim also is difficult to be the defendant.