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

On October 6, 2011, the Defendant loaned money to the victim E in the first floor of the building underground in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (former trade name G) that the victim would be able to pay KRW 25 million to the victim for an entertainment tavern’s obligation with respect to the said entertainment tavern, who worked before theme to work as a marina for the said entertainment tavern.

However, in fact, the defendant did not have any idea to work in the above F entertainment tavern, and even if he did not receive the above money from the victim because there was no particular income at the time, he did not have any intention or ability to pay it.

Around October 7, 2011, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, had the victim deliver the said KRW 25 million to the victim I, a person in charge of the entertainment drinking club.

Accordingly, the defendant deceivings the victim and defrauds the above money.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness E, J and I;

1. The defendant's defense counsel's defense counsel regarding the contents of a promissory note, loan certificate, employee loan certificate, agreement for payment, certificate of personal seal impression, personal immigration status, each letter, and the defendant's defense counsel's defense of the defendant's defense counsel. The defendant's defense counsel asserts that the defendant's liability is not a crime of fraud, in light of the fact that the defendant's obligation to the victim is about the attempted amount of credit on customers between the president of an entertainment drinking club and employees, and it is invalid in violation of Article 27 of the former Labor Standards Act prohibiting liquidated damages between the employer and the employee and Articles 103 through 104 of the Civil Act, and it is difficult to recognize that the victim actually paid the defendant's monetary payment obligation of KRW 25 million to the I.

According to the above evidence, the Defendant worked as a so-called “mast” in the “K” entertainment drinking club operated by the Defendant, and the “H” entertainment drinking club operated by the Defendant, and both the entertainment drinking house owners.