Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10 million.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

1. Fraud;

A. A. Around April 5, 2010, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim D and the victim E at the notary public C office in the north-gu Mapo-gu Mapo-si Mapo-si, B at port on April 5, 2010, stating that “If the Defendant lends KRW 6 million to the victim D and E, he/she will complete payment up to July 30, 2010.”

However, in fact, since the debt was approximately KRW 100 million at the time, and there was no revenue, there was no intention or ability to repay the debt even if it was borrowed money.

The Defendant received 3 million won from the victim D, and 3 million won from the victim E, in other words, as the borrowed money.

Accordingly, the defendant was provided property by deceiving the victims.

B. Around May 3, 2010, the Defendant made a false statement that “Around May 3, 2010, the Defendant would repay the victim D by June 30, 2010 if he/she borrowed five million won to the victim D at the above place.”

However, the fact did not have the intention or ability to repay the borrowed money on the grounds of the preceding paragraph.

The Defendant received 5 million won from the victim, namely, from the victim, i.e., the borrowed money.

Accordingly, the defendant was provided property by deceiving the victims.

2. On May 19, 2010, the Defendant forged a real estate lease agreement consisting of the lessor G, the lessee, the lessee, and the deposit 25 million won, using a computer at the Defendant’s house located in the north-gu, North Korea at the expense of the Defendant’s house located in the B of Mapo-gu, North Korea, and subsequently presented a falsified real estate lease agreement to the victim D and the victim E at the above notary public’s office on May 19, 2010, and the Defendant provided a falsified real estate lease agreement by July 19, 2010, stating that the said agreement would be repaid until July 19, 2010.”

However, in fact, the Defendant did not have a claim for refund of the deposit amounting to KRW 25 million, since the Defendant provided the lessor with deposit amounting to KRW 5 million and leased the store, and the obligation was limited to KRW 100 million, from the victims.