A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

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

Punishment of the crime

Although the Defendant is the father-Nam and is a person who performs hospital planning duties in the hospital management planning office and is not a doctor, on January 2012, the Defendant had been working for the victim B, who became aware of through Internet hosting, is an unmarried, occupation, and marriage with the victim as if he were married with the victim.

1. On January 19, 2012, the Defendant told the victim at an infinite place that “Isnman finite was hospitalized in Amphina hospital, and the hospital expenses are urgently needed. There is money to receive retirement allowances from the Seoul Seoul Hospital at the branch, and the Defendant would receive retirement allowances within one month from lending money.”

However, in fact, there was no retirement allowance from the Seoul Metropolitan Hospital, and the mother was not hospitalized in the ASEAN Hospital, and he was able to repay his personal debt, so even if he borrowed money from the victim, there was no intention or ability to complete the payment.

The defendant, from the victim on January 19, 2012, KRW 1.5 million around 1.5 million, and the same year.

1.31.Around 31.850,00 won, under the same year;

4.2.B. around 2.3 million won, which was transferred to the Defendant’s account as a loan, in the name of 4.65 million won.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

2. On April 2, 2012, the Defendant made a false statement that “The Defendant, at an insular place, calls from the victim to “no longer borrow any more thanks to the shortage of hospital costs, and, at the hospital expense, borrowed the me to immediately repay, and the joint and several surety is changed.”

However, in fact, the mother was not hospitalized in the ASEAN Hospital, and the mother was able to repay other debts with the borrowed money or use them as living expenses at the time, and was responsible for the large amount of debts at the time, so even if the victim was given joint and several sureties, there was no intention or ability to repay the loan properly.

The defendant is against the victim.