A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant 2: (a) registered as a business entity "D" in Ilyang-si, Ilyang-si, Seoul and 506, and issued tax invoice to another person; (b) was subject to a tax investigation regarding the issuance of tax invoice, and (c) made a false statement to the effect that he/she would temporarily lend the money to the other party; and (d) received the money from them to use it for the repayment of his/her personal debt.

1. On May 14, 2017, the Defendant committing the crime against the victim E ought to post a phone call to the victim E in the direction of the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan City F, Gyeyang-gu, and pay the money to the bank’s account in line with the tax account bill.

50% of total amount is 25,000,000 won and 50% of total amount is arbitrarily prepared and sent, and 11,830,000 won which is the remainder 50% is remitted to the account.

It is intended to return money two days after making the details of deposit transactions.

“False speech was made to the effect that it was “.”

However, at the time, the Defendant had intended to use the payment of the debt and the payment of the tax, even if he borrowed the money from the injured party, with a total of KRW 260 million of the personal debt and the tax in arrears, and there was no intention or ability to repay it.

On June 8, 2017, the Defendant received 11,830,000 won from the Defendant’s national bank account (G) in the name of the Defendant on the pretext of borrowing money from the damaged party, and acquired it by fraud.

2. The Defendant does not recognize the part of cash approval with respect to the tax invoice issued before the victim H by telephone at a place on early June 2017, at the tax office where the Defendant committed the crime against the victim H by telephone.

It is necessary to make a deposit sheet for 60% and to specify cash transactions for the remaining 40%.

If 60,230,00 won is remitted to the head of the Tong, it will be returned until June 12, 2017.

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

However, as above, the Defendant borrowed money from the damaged party due to considerable debts at the time.