A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

around November 15, 2013, the Defendant paid KRW 1 million interest per month when he/she lent KRW 40 million to the victim E at the D Judicial Scriveners Office located in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City (Seoul Special Metropolitan City) with the fund for bond business, and paid the principal by November 15, 2014.

“The purpose of “ was to make a false statement.”

However, even if the Defendant borrowed money from the injured party, it was thought that it would be used to repay the principal and interest according to the agreement, and there was no intent to do business with the injured party to do so. At the time, the Defendant had already been urged to pay the total amount of KRW 50 million to other creditors, and failed to do so. On September 2013, 2013, the Defendant was under the control of the sexual traffic business place operated by the Defendant, and there was no intention or ability to pay the principal and interest according to the agreement, because it was in fact impossible for the Defendant to do business.

Nevertheless, the defendant was issued a passbook and a check card in the bank account (Account Number F) in the name of the victim in which KRW 40,000 is deposited from the victim's seat as a loan from the victim.

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

In fact, the Defendant did not own any property under the name of the Defendant, and was punished for a violation of the Act on the Registration of Large Side Business, etc. and the Protection of Financial Users on September 2007, and did not make any deposit transaction due to the failure to pay the surcharge of KRW 71,500,000, which was imposed on him/her. In addition, the Defendant’s loan claim was in arrears with the management expenses of the Mamba business operated by the Defendant. Although the Defendant’s loan claim was 560,000,000 won, the Defendant’s loan claim was in excess of 560,000,000 won, but there was no non-performing loan claim with the obligor’s whereabouts or there was no possibility of de facto recovery due to the lack of financial resources. Accordingly, income does not exist because the Defendant’s commercial sex business operated around September 2013 was under a condition that it was practically impossible