beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than nine months.
However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Reasons
Criminal facts
"2017 Highest 3324"
1. Fraud;
A. On December 2015, 2015, the Defendant: (a) made a false statement to the victim B by phone call to the victim B that “I would succeed to the obligation by changing the name of the loan, if I received the loan under the name of thener, on the ground that I would have to pay KRW 28 million that I would have received from C, etc. before the towing; and (b) as I would have to pay money due to living expenses, etc., I would have to do so.”
However, since the defendant did not have assets in his name, and his personal debt took about KRW 30,000,000 and thought to receive additional loans due to continuous lack of living expenses, the defendant did not have the intent or ability to succeed to the above debt or to repay the loan even if he received the loan, as above, even if he did not have the victim receive the loan.
Nevertheless, on December 2015, the Defendant got the victim to borrow KRW 40 million from the Habacom Savings Bank, KRW 10 million from the Gaba Savings Bank, KRW 21 million from the Gaba Savings Bank, and KRW 71 million from the Gaba Savings Bank, and then received and acquired the aforementioned money around that time.
B. On September 26, 2016, the Defendant did not grant a loan under the name of B to obtain a loan to the victim B by calls from the victim B at a US-U.S. store on September 26, 2016.
D. The Plaintiff borrowed the remainder of the loan, except interest not paid by the Plaintiff upon receipt of the loan, concluded that the Plaintiff would fully repay the loan with the money and succeed to the obligation by changing the name of the loan.
However, the Defendant had no asset in his name, and his personal debt was approximately KRW 30 million due to continuous living costs, and was additionally loaned KRW 36 million between January 2016 and March 201, and thus, even if the Defendant received a loan from the victim, it is also liable for the above loan even if the Defendant received such loan from the victim.