A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Punishment of the crime

On January 13, 2011, the Defendant was sentenced to one year and six months of imprisonment for fraud at the Seoul Northern District Court (Seoul Northern District Court) on June 14, 201, and completed the execution of the sentence in the Seoul Eastern Detention Center.

1. On January 23, 2014, the Defendant: (a) at a building office located in F in the Gyeonggi-si, Gyeonggi-do; (b) the victim E intends to jointly carry on an officetel business with the owner of land in the Guri-si; and (c) the corporate acquisition funds necessary therefor are required.

A loan of KRW 20 million shall be extended to KRW 10 million to the principal after one month.

“The phrase “ was false.”

However, the fact that the defendant did not properly secure the legal entity that will take over at that time, and there was no other place to make any other profit as well as there was no intention or ability to pay the principal and interest as agreed with the victim one month after the date of the loan, since there was no other place to make profits.

Nevertheless, the Defendant received 20 million won from the injured party on the same day.

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

2. The Defendant, from November 1, 2013 to November 24, 2015, borrowed hospital fees to the victim AF by phone to the victim, and offered KRW 100 million to the bank through a real estate business. The Defendant, “a loan to the victim.”, “a loan to pay a fine”, “a loan to the defective performance insurance policy fee”, and “a loan to the bank from money,” and “a loan from the bank to KRW 3 billion shall be granted through a real estate business.”

“The phrase “ was false.”

However, in fact, the defendant tried to implement the real estate business of Gangnam-gu Seoul AG hotel acquisition business, Gyeonggi-gu house construction business, etc. with the money raised through financial institutions, bonds, etc. without the defendant's funds at all, but this was merely the part of the defendant's remote plan, and there was no specific part of the defendant's remote plan. The defendant did not have any living allowance in the state of significant excess of debt at that time, and there was no other place of profit.