A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for five years.

Punishment of the crime

[2018Gohap17]

1. On February 10, 2018, the Defendant stated that “The Defendant would pay the victim B money from selling and selling the imported tea, which is urgently needed. The Defendant would pay the money from the entry of the revenue vehicle on June 10, 2018. The Defendant would pay the interest of KRW 5 million per month if he/she lends money.”

However, in fact, the Defendant did not sell and buy the imported heavy vehicles, and was thought that the Defendant would invest the funds borrowed from the victim in the Thailand, Magy, and Lcare Business (hereinafter “Tai”) in Thailand. Since the Thailand business that decided to make an investment was actually conducted, it was almost unlikely to make profits in the future, it was unlikely that there was no substantial progress of the business, such as the establishment of a place of business, employment of employees, etc., so even if the Defendant borrowed money from the victim, there was no intention or ability to pay the money within the repayment

The Defendant, including by deceiving the victim as above and receiving KRW 1,00,000 from the victim who was in its possession, by deceiving the victim over 45 times from around that time to October 3, 2018, and by deceiving the victim over 45 times as shown in attached Table 1, the Defendant acquired a total of KRW 516,40,000 from the victim.

2. On January 24, 2018, the Defendant told the victim C by phoneing the phone, and saying, “D, the place where the fishery products are used, need to be purchased,” the Defendant said that “on a loan of KRW 70 million,00,000,000, the Defendant may pay interest of KRW 8 million, and on a five-month subsequent to the fourth month.”

However, fact D requires a sudden challenge to the defendant.

There was no fact that he borrowed or borrowed money.

The Defendant was willing to invest in the Defendant’s personal debt repayment or Thailand’s business, and the Thai project that intended to make an investment did not actually proceed with as set forth in paragraph (1) above, and thus was less likely to make profits in the future. Therefore, even if the Defendant borrowed money from the victim, it would be willing to pay the said money.