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

except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

Around July 2009, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim C (50 years of age) in the car page located in Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Jongno-ro 3, stating that “At all times, the Defendant is running a hotel business at all times, and almost ended. However, the Defendant would pay interest of KRW 100,000 after lending KRW 50,000 as he/she urgently needs to pay money.”

However, since the defendant did not have certain assets and income at the time, there was no intention or ability to repay even if he borrowed 50 million won.

Nevertheless, around July 22, 2009, the Defendant received KRW 50 million in total from the victim’s “F” office located in Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Jongno-gu D, 50 million cashier’s checks.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness C and G;

1. Each police statement concerning C and G;

1. Statement C in the police interrogation protocol of the accused (second time)

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the chief of a complaint, a copy of a cashier's check (41 pages), and a copy of a certificate (No. 1185, 209) of the Act and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Judgment on the defendant's assertion under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act

1. Regarding the assertion that the defendant did not have the intent to acquire money, according to the above evidence, it is recognized that the defendant did not borrow money from the victim and did not repay it, together with the promise to use and return it for a short period of time as expenses related to the hotel business.

In addition, in light of various circumstances, such as the amount of debts that the defendant assumed in relation to the hotel business at the time, it is recognized that the defendant had the intention to commit fraud at least at the time of borrowing money.

Defendant’s assertion is not accepted.

2. On August 2010, the Defendant prepared a written statement of performance with H around 2010 and the Defendant’s statement of performance.