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

around June 2015, the Defendant stated that “If the head of the Tong is seized and the head of the Tong is attached, he/she will pay the money after the release of the seizure of the head of the Tong if he/she lends money to the victim F (35 years of the head of the Tong) who was aware of through Mo D (No. E).”

However, at the time of fact, the defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay money even if he/she borrowed money from the damaged party due to bad credit standing.

Ultimately, on June 24, 2015, the Defendant, as seen above, received KRW 1,400,000 from the National Bank account in the name of G, other than the public prosecution, as a loan, as well as from March 11, 2015 to February 28, 2017, acquired and acquired KRW 59,160,000 in total over 46 times from March 11, 2015 to February 28, 2017 as stated in the list of crimes in the attached crime.

"2017 Highest 2151"

1. Fraud against victim H;

A. On February 5, 2014, the Defendant made a false statement on February 5, 2014, that “The Defendant would pay the Defendant money by lending KRW 300,000 to K, first of all, on the face of a loan from the victim H located in Lhodong-gun I, which is operated by the victim H.”

However, the Defendant used a provisional name and committed an act as if he/she hiddenly hiddenly, and even if he/she received money from the injured party under the pretext of advance payment because he/she did not have any property due to bad credit standing at the time, he/she did not have any intent or ability to perform the said money as agreed by the injured party.

The Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim, received 300,000 won from the same place on the same day from the victim.

B. On February 12, 2014, around February 12, 2014, the Defendant concluded that “Around February 12, 2014, the Defendant would lend the Defendant’s personal phone fee to the victim and make a full payment.”

However, the Defendant is identical with the foregoing “1-A”.