A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Punishment of the crime

On April 15, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment for fraud, etc. at the Seoul Central District Court, and was released on October 28, 2009 from Seoul Detention Center on the parole on October 31, 2009 during the execution of the sentence.

around April 14, 2010, the Defendant “2016 Highest 2749” managed VIP customers in precious metal so far as he/she is a victim E at D D dental stores located in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C Building 205.

If the Montreal is lent KRW 100 million, it shall be sold after purchasing it, and shall be paid KRW 10 million each month with its profits, and the principal shall be returned after two to three months.

The loan was made by false statement, “A dentist H will give a guarantee to a dentist, who is a number of pages.”

However, the defendant did not have the intent or ability to purchase the Montreal because he thought that he would use it for the personal purpose with the money invested as above.

Therefore, the Defendant received a total of KRW 188,830,000 from the victims or received KRW 100,000 from the victims to the post office account under the name of the Defendant, including the fact that the Defendant deceivings the victims as above and transferred KRW 100,000 from the victims to March 30, 2012, in the same manner as the list in the attached crime list.

"2017 Highest 43"

1. On October 25, 2010, the Defendant against the victim I made a false statement to the victim that “Around October 25, 2010, the Defendant would purchase Cub cars within a week on the face of the week in which the victim would lend the same vehicle as the vehicle franchising to the gambling from the river franchiscing to the franchising to the franchising of the franchiscing to the franchising of the franchiscing to the franchiscing.”

However, the defendant did not have any intention or ability to purchase a vehicle because he thought that he would use it for personal living expenses even if he received money from the victim as above.

Therefore, the defendant deceivings the victim as above and belongs to it.