A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than ten months.

Criminal facts

On February 12, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for fraud, etc. at the Incheon District Court on February 12, 2009 and completed the execution of the sentence on October 9, 2009.

1. On April 2012, the Defendant stated to the effect that “D” restaurant in Yongsan-gu, Yongsan-gu, Yongsan-gu, Seoul and the victim E, who works as an employee, planned to open a restaurant in the G restaurant in the next G restaurant of the F Library, and the down payment is insufficient. If the Defendant borrowed money, he/she would have to pay back on April 12, 2012, the husband’s monthly seal.”

However, at the time of fact, the Defendant had no particular property, and there was a need to pay the amount equivalent to KRW 500,000 as interest every month when the obligation for the loan was about KRW 20,000,000,000, and there was no intention or ability to repay the loan even if the Defendant borrowed money from the victim as a registration fee for children.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim on April 6, 2012, received 1.3 million won from the Defendant’s corporate bank account from the victim to the Defendant’s corporate bank account under the pretext of borrowing money.

2. On July 1, 2013, the Defendant: (a) at the 1181 teachers’ office in the 9th floor of the Yongsan-gu, Yongsan-gu, Seoyang-gu; and (b) at the 1181 teachers’ office in the 10th floor of the 1181 teachers’ office; (c) upon the request of the husband’s employment from the victim H, the Defendant told the victim to the effect that “Seoul-si works in GM treatment, so that he would be employed as a non-regular worker in the GM treatment of the company through the husband

However, in fact, the husband of the defendant was employed as a production worker in the GM treatment, and did not have the husband of the victim's work as an employee of the company, and there was a plan to use the money received from the victim as a share investment or a repayment of individual debt, so even if he received the money from the victim, he did not have the intention or ability to employ the husband of the victim in the company.