Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

1. On August 24, 2012, the Defendant calls to the victim at a place where the location is unknown, and provided that the Defendant temporarily lends money to the victim because it is difficult to operate a superior office.

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

However, there was no intention or ability to repay the money even if the money was borrowed from the injured party.

The Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim, received 4.75 million won from the complainant to the Agricultural Cooperative Account (D) in the name of the No.C on the same day.

2. On September 11, 2012, the Defendant calls at a place where the location is unknown and lends money only once to the Defendant because it is difficult to operate a superior office. The Defendant is to pay back immediately.

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

However, there was no intention or ability to repay the money even if the money was borrowed from the injured party.

The Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 10 million from the damaged party to the said Agricultural Cooperative Account in the name of the said C as a loan.

Summary of Evidence

1. Entry of the defendant in part in the first trial record;

1. Recording of the witness E's statement in the second public trial records;

1. Application of the witness F’s legal statement Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 347 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of a fine (in general, selection of a fine);

1. Articles 70 and 69(2) of the former Criminal Act (Amended by Act No. 12575, May 14, 2014);

1. Determination on the assertion by the Defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The alleged defendant merely borrowed money from the damaged party in order to raise the guidance money to be paid to the party funeral because the members of the fraternity he operated did not pay the guidance money properly, and does not borrow money from the damaged party in relation to the operation of the standing office as stated in the facts charged of this case.

In addition, the Defendant had the intent or ability to repay the borrowed money of this case, and on August 24, 2012, five million won of the borrowed money has already been paid.