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

On November 6, 2013, the Defendant, at a C office located in a place where it is unknown to the Incheon or lower level, prepared a written agreement on the part of automobile purchase to the effect that “one million won is loaned from the victim KB Capital Co., Ltd. (former trade name before the change: Korean wave Co., Ltd.) to pay KRW 371,126 per month (total KRW 13,493,593),” and submitted it to E by the victim’s employees.

However, at the time, the Defendant provided the above car as a collateral and planned to obtain a loan from another person, and there is no particular property, and there was no intention or ability to pay it properly even if the Defendant received a loan from the victim company as the purchase price of the car.

As such, the Defendant deceivings employees belonging to the victim company and received 10 million won as loans from the victim company around that time.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the details of scheduled repayment, a copy of the agreement of middle and second and/or loan, and a copy of automobile register;

1. Relevant Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is that the amount acquired by the Defendant from the victim for the reason of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act has not reached a considerable amount of KRW 10 million, but the victim has not been recovered from damage, and that the Defendant committed the instant crime without being aware of the fact that he had been punished by a fine due to fraud, etc. around 2008.

On the other hand, it seems that the defendant has divided his wrong and reflects his wrong, and that there is no criminal record exceeding the fine, etc. are favorable to the defendant.