A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant,

1. On March 20, 201, at the office of the Defendant’s friendly “E” in the Defendant’s 10th floor in Seocho-gu Seoul Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Cbuilding, the victim F was willing to invest in the Internet horse business, even if he/she borrowed money from the victim F, and was in a state of bad credit standing at the time, and was not in an intent or ability to repay the debt equivalent to KRW 100 million, the false statement stating that “I wish to make an investment in the PC located in Namyang-gu, Nam-gu, Seoul. I wish to lend KRW 20 million to the PC located in Nam-gu, and will pay the interest rate of KRW 5% per month and pay it within three months.” The victim shall receive from the victim F to the Defendant’s account through the said D account and shall obtain from the Defendant’s G through the said D account.

2. On April 1, 201, the victim F, the victim H, and the victim H, did not have the intent or ability to repay the loan even in the case of borrowing money from the victims due to the circumstances such as Paragraph 1 of this Article, at the first floor coffee shop of the above C building, on the same day, the victim’s false statement stating that “The PC-to-be loaned an additional amount of KRW 30 million,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 from the victim F for the borrowed money and KRW 19,000,000,000,000 from the victim H, was obtained from the victim F to the said G account on the same day.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness F and D;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. A loan certificate, a specification of transactions in Korean banks, and a specification of transactions in Korean banks;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes for investigation reporting;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act selecting a penalty;

1. Determination as to the defendant and his defense counsel's assertion among concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act

1. The summary of the argument is that the defendant merely borrowed money from D and does not borrow money from the victims. Thus, the defendant and his defense counsel borrowed money from D.