A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. On July 31, 2017, the Defendant committed a crime on July 31, 2017, at the victim D’s office near the B apartment complex B during the 2017, the Defendant supplied money to the victim D to operate the corporation E.

F. The F.I.D. will lend money as security to the F.F. building 604 contract.

The phrase “ makes a false statement.”

However, in fact, while the debt amounts to approximately KRW 2.9 billion, the assets are in excess of the debt amounting to approximately KRW 800,000,000, such as receipts of construction payment and inventory assets, and the above F building 604 had already been sold to another person and cannot be offered as security to the victim, so even if the Defendant borrowed money from the damaged person, the Defendant did not have any intent and ability to repay it.

Ultimately, on July 31, 2017, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim as above; (b) obtained the transfer from the victim to the financial account (Account Number: H) in the name of G designated by the Defendant on the pretext of the loan from the victim; and (c) obtained the transfer from the victim to the financial account.

2. The Defendant committed the crime of August 25, 2017, at the place indicated in paragraph 1 around August 20, 2017, “The approval of the lending of bank funds was obtained” to the victim at the place indicated in paragraph 1, and the Defendant did not receive the loan due to default of national taxes of KRW 36 million.

If a national tax is paid in arrears by lending KRW 30 million, it is possible to borrow money in the Suhyup Bank as operating expenses separately from the above PF funds. By September 1, 2017, it is intended to repay the operating expenses to KRW 40 million in total up to KRW 10 million.

The phrase “ makes a false statement.”

However, in fact, the Defendant had already been able to borrow KRW 20,000,000,000 per month, and it was expected to be used as monthly wage and management expenses, so even if operating expenses were to be loaned, the Defendant could not pay KRW 40,000,000 to the Defendant. In addition, as described in paragraph 1, it was already in excess of his/her obligation, and thus, the Defendant is obliged to pay the amount even if he/she borrowed money from the damaged person.