A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than ten months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On July 22, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years on a year after he/she was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years on December 8, 2016, due to the crime of re-afusing electronic records, etc. at the Suwon Flag Flag.

Criminal facts

1. The defrauded by fraud of KRW 25 million in cash is a program operated by the victim C in Gangnam-gu Seoul on October 2015 by the victim C, and is a program with a good profitability for the victim to carry on a crypt game business like the baby type.

The degree of KRW 50 million shall be lent to the business fund, and 20% of the revenue to be paid in the face of the city shall be paid in full after six months.

In the absence of such money, the loan was made by false means.

However, the defendant was merely intended to use a loan from the victim to repay money, and did not have the intent or ability to proceed with the project with the above money, and even if he borrowed money from the victim due to no particular income, he did not have the intent or ability to repay money as agreed upon.

The Defendant, as seen above, was falsified and then transferred KRW 25 million to the Defendant’s account opened in the name of the Defendant around November 6, 2015.

2. On November 2015, the Defendant continued to acquire the franchise by fraud, and the Defendant would use the vehicle as a business fund by lending the vehicle to the victim as a security because the business fund is insufficient due to the lack of business funds for the 250 million won, and recover the vehicle after three months.

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

However, in fact, the defendant was merely intended to repay the defendant's debt with the money borrowed by the victim's offering as security, and did not have the intent or ability to proceed with the project with the above money. There was no particular income, and there was no intention or ability to return the money to the victim due to the lack of any other income.

Defendant 1 made such a false statement, and thereafter, Defendant 23 million won at the market price around that time from the injured party.