A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

【Criminal Records of Crimes】 On January 15, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment for a crime in the Suwon District Court’s Pyeongtaek District Court’s housing site site, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on July 4, 2015.

[Criminal Facts]

1. On February 29, 2012, the Defendant committed a crime on February 29, 2012: (a) the Defendant partially modified the facts charged to the extent that it does not interfere with the exercise of the right of defense to receive payment of the money from the victim C, to the extent that it does not lend the money that is needed to pay for business, and that it does not interfere with the exercise of the right of defense to receive payment of the money.

The facts charged have made a false statement to the effect that “The monthly interest on the loan of money shall be given, and the money shall be paid in one month.”

However, the Defendant had no intention or ability to pay the amount normally even if he/she borrowed money from the injured party because the Defendant had already accumulated debt amounting to KRW 70 million due to the failure to pay wages and taxes, etc., and there was no fixed profit.

Ultimately, the Defendant deceivings the victim as above and received 4.5 million won from the victim’s account under the name of the Defendant (National Bank D).

2. On March 2013, the Defendant, at the F office operated by the Defendant located in Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government around March 2013, the Defendant concluded that “Around March 2013, the Defendant would make a false statement to the victim C that “Around March 2013, the Defendant would have to enter into an external doping advertisement contract with the vehicle of 2.50 vehicles with the vehicle of 12,000,000 won for one month, and would have to receive KRW 25 million for the previous borrowed money.”

However, in fact, the conclusion of the doping advertising contract was not confirmed, which was discussed with G personnel, and even if the defendant borrowed money from the injured party, there was no intention or ability to pay it normally.

In the facts charged, “However, the Defendant was merely a stage of reviewing the external doping advertising scheme with G officials in charge of G and selective vehicles, and there was no discussion to conclude an advertising contract.

“ Ultimately, the Defendant deceivings the victim as above.