A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On May 20, 201, the Defendant had borrowed KRW 30 million from the victim B, and had failed to repay it, and had attempted to cancel the provisional attachment by deceiving the victim with the defect of provisional attachment No. 2016Kadan201438 on July 22, 2016, by the order of provisional attachment No. 2016, which was owned by the Defendant.

On August 24, 2016, the Defendant stated that “The Defendant shall sell the house at the seat of the head of Jongno-gu Seoul E and repaid the borrowed money to the Defendant at the seat of the head of the house upon cancellation of provisional seizure” at the clothing sales store operated by the parent of the Defendant in Jongno-gu Seoul E.

However, in fact, the Defendant had been liable for the debt amounting to KRW 480 million at the time, and the victim had been thought to transfer the ownership of the above apartment under the name of debt repayment to the creditor F even if the above provisional seizure was cancelled, so there was no intention or ability to repay the borrowed money to the victim as agreed by the victim.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, had the victim file an application for the rescission of the provisional seizure of this case on August 31, 2016, and had the victim acquire the above provisional seizure from the cancellation of the claim amounting to 30 million won on September 6, 2016.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of the witness B;

1. Investigation report (the contents of conversations with G certified judicial scrivener and complainants); and

1. A written statement (one copy of evidence record, 28 pages), a certified copy of a notarial deed, or promissory note;

1. A certified copy of the apartment registry and the defense counsel did not make the victim the same statement as the facts constituting the crime, and if the victim would have cancelled the provisional seizure, the victim would make an agreement that the victim would make a provisional seizure again after setting up the right to collateral security in the F future, and then cancelled the provisional seizure. Since the victim could not make a provisional seizure again without communication, it did not induce the victim and did not intend to commit the crime of defraudation, the following is acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court.