A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On May 2013, 2013, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim B, stating that “A person who was able to jointly operate put put in place and put in place, and the victim, who invested KRW 100 million, the Defendant himself/herself would borrow KRW 2-300 million from put in place and put in place, thereby purchasing a new site for put in place and put in place.”

However, even if the defendant received the above money from the injured party, he was planned to use it for the repayment of personal debts and the investment in the bond business, and he did not have the intent or ability to purchase the newly built site of put-in place.

Nevertheless, on May 31, 2013, the Defendant issued a deposit and withdrawal card connected to the so-called “the so-called “mast Account”) loan account under the victim’s name from May 31, 2013, and acquired 65 million won by means of cash withdrawal and account transfer, etc. as shown in the attached Table Nos. 1 through No. 6 of the crime list from around that time to June 8, 2013. On June 12, 2013, the Defendant continued to have the victim receive 38 million won from the Saemaul Treasury to deposit the above account with the lending of 38 million won from the Saemaul Treasury, and then, from around that time to July 25, 2013, the Defendant acquired 40 million won by means of cash withdrawal and account transfer, such as the attached Table No. 7 through No. 9.

Summary of Evidence

1. The Defendant’s report on the investigation (Evidence List No. 15) of transaction details of the Defendant’s partial statement witness B’s statutory statement - the Defendant was actually trying to run in order to save put in place and put money, but the Defendant did not establish put in place and put money, but did not intend to acquire money from the victim from the beginning, only because it did not establish put in place and put money, which is more cost than expected.

The argument is asserted.

In full view of the evidence duly adopted and examined by this Court, the Defendant may borrow 2-300 million won from the Defendant to the victim.

In order to promote the establishment of put put-in place to place money by adding the amount of KRW 100 million to the victim.

“The victim stated that it was “............. the Defendant’s money.”