A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. On March 25, 2014, the Defendant told the victim C to the effect that “A person who has a debt owed to him/her is able to recover the debt with him/her, and a person who has borrowed 15 million won to him/her, will complete the payment in installments within six months.”

However, at that time, the Defendant had to pay 3.1 million won as the monthly interest, while monthly income was only 2-3 million won, the apartment house in the name of the Defendant did not have economic value since the right to collateral security was established in an amount equivalent to 1.60 million won, and there was no other property, and even if the Defendant borrowed money from the damaged person due to the absence of any other property, there was no intention or ability to repay it within six months.

The defendant deceivings the victim as above and was remitted 15 million won to the Saemaul Treasury account in the name of the defendant under the name of the victim as the borrowed money from the victim on the same day.

2. The Defendant committed the crime around June 25, 2014, at the home of the Defendant around June 25, 2014, and the victim’s father was killed in the victim’s phone by telephone.

D Property equivalent to about 10 billion won, such as 60 square buildings and horizontal land in 60 square meters, may be inherited.

As the current inheritance problem is under way, the cost of attorney-at-law is required to be loaned 2 million won. The purport of the purport that the ownership in the building of dental stores in the E market has been transferred to the future, which is that the monthly rent of the building of the commercial building and the repayment shall be made to the middle of August, as well as the 15 million won that has been borrowed in March.

However, the Defendant did not have received the transfer of ownership of the above commercial building in the E market at that time, and did not proceed with a lawsuit on inheritance, and because there was another obligation, so even if he borrowed money from the damaged party, the Defendant did not have the ability to pay it up to August 2014.

The defendant deceivings the victim as above and borrowed money from the victim on the same day.