A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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 May 3, 2012, the Defendant against the victim D would pay 1.3% interest per month on the F cafeteria operated by the victim D, who is a land located in Hanam-gun, Hanam-gun, Hanam-gun, with the victim’s “30 million won of shares and 1.3% interest per month.”

Even if the shares are lost, the apartment house which lives is secured by the loan shall be repaid with the principal.

“A false statement was made to the effect that it was “.”

However, the Defendant, who received money from the injured party, was thought to use only a part of the money for shares for personal living expenses, etc., and the above apartment house has already been established with about KRW 130 million, which did not notify the injured party of the fact that there was no value of collateral, and there was no intention to have the right to repay the borrowed money to the injured party.

The Defendant, on May 3, 2012, received KRW 10 million from the injured party on the pretext of the borrowed money from around May 3, 2012, from the time to June 21, 2013, and obtained the total amount of KRW 80,00,000 from the time to June 21, 2013, including the issuance of KRW 10,000 from the damaged party.

2. On September 21, 2012, the criminal defendant against the victim G would pay 1.3% interest per month by lending KRW 40 million to the victim G that he/she became aware of through D in the above two lux restaurants around September 21, 2012.

Even if the shares are lost, the apartment house which lives is secured by the loan shall be repaid with the principal.

“A false statement was made to the effect that it was “.”

However, the Defendant, who received money from the injured party, was thought to use only a part of the money for shares for personal living expenses, etc., and the above apartment house has already been established with about KRW 130 million, which did not notify the injured party of the fact that there was no value of collateral, and there was no intention to have the right to repay the borrowed money to the injured party.

The Defendant received KRW 40 million from the injured party on or around September 21, 2012 as the borrowed money.