Defendant shall be punished by a fine of five million won.

If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

On May 11, 2006, the Defendant was sentenced to 8 months of imprisonment for fraud at the Seoul Northern District Court and 2 years of suspended execution, and the above judgment was finalized on August 25, 2006. On September 28, 2012, the Seoul Central District Court sentenced to imprisonment for 10 months, 2 years of suspended execution, 2 years of probation, and 120 hours of community service order and became final and conclusive on December 27, 2012.

On March 18, 2011, the Defendant: (a) had no or intent to obtain a loan by using the land owned by the victim’s Incheon-gun B as collateral at a bank; (b) had the victim C, who had no capacity or intent to obtain a loan by using the land owned by the victim’s Incheon-gun B; (c) had the victim C, stating, “I will return to March 28, 201 if the loan is not executed, by not later than March 28, 2011”, the Defendant acquired 20 million won from the victim to the SC Japan bank account in the name of the Defendant on the same day.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. A copy of a loan certificate and a certificate of transfer;

1. Previous records of judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to inquiries by a defendant, such as his/her legal statement and criminal history, and reporting results of confirmation;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of punishment;

1. The instant crime involving concurrent crimes is one of the concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act with a judgment rendered on December 27, 2012. However, due to the existence of a judgment rendered on August 25, 2006, the instant crime and the instant fraud could not be adjudicated at the same time due to the beginning. Therefore, Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act does not apply (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Do948, Oct. 27, 201).

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;