A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, 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

On June 20, 2011, the Defendant made a false statement to the staff in charge of the loan of the victim two capitals Co., Ltd. at the D office located in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju, stating that “The Defendant will repay KRW 1,757,850 per month for 36 months, when he/she loans KRW 50,000 from the purchase fund of high-speed capital.”

However, in fact, the defendant purchased the above high-speed mining season from E and paid the above price in full, and there was no intention to use the above loan as a fund for the operation of his heavy equipment business, even if he received the loan from the victim, even though he did not intend to use it for the purchase of high-speed mining season.

The defendant received KRW 50 million from the victim as a fund for the purchase of scambling machines on the same day on the same day.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of F, G, H, and I;

1. Application of each Act or subordinate statute of the written agreement on loan application and deposit statement (50 million won);

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Although the Defendant did not recognize the facts constituting a crime, as in the instant case, even if the Defendant applied for a loan to a financial institution for the purpose other than the application, if the Defendant concealed the intent to use the loan for the purpose of using the loan for the purpose other than the application, a crime of fraud is established under the Criminal Act. In the instant case, the agreement on loan application submitted by the Defendant stipulates that the purpose of the loan is for the payment of the purchase price of the mid-term equipment sales contract concluded with E, and 2) at the time, I stated that the Defendant would have known that he would use the loan for the purpose other than for the purchase price of the loan, and that he would have never expressed that he would use the loan for the purpose other than for the purchase price of the loan at the time.