beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than ten months.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
1. On May 2010, the criminal defendant against the victim B made a false statement to the victim B, “The money is in preparation for a restaurant, and the money is insufficient. If the principal is lent KRW 15 million to the victim, the principal shall be paid immediately after using only five to six months, and the interest shall be paid at 5% per month.”
However, in fact, the Defendant had already been operating a restaurant from around 2009, and was unable to pay 10% of the monthly interest on the borrowed money from the branch at the time of opening the restaurant, and even if additional money was borrowed from the victim, it was thought that it was used in the “lacing” “lacing,” and there was no intention or ability to newly operate a restaurant and pay the principal and interest to the victim.
Nevertheless, on May 31, 2010, the Defendant appears to be in writing to be the “Agricultural Bank Account (G)” as stated in the indictment from the Defendant’s Agricultural Bank Account (D) under the name of the Defendant.
(Evidence Records 16 pages) At that time received KRW 15 million from that time until August 30, 2010, as shown in [Attachment 1] Nos. 1 to 2, 200,000 won from that time, including the remittance of KRW 15 million.
Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.
2. On June 2010, the criminal defendant against the victim E made a false statement to the victim E, who was newly in his/her possession in Bupyeong-gu, Incheon, Bupyeong-gu, Incheon, stating, “If he/she was in preparation for a restaurant, but the money is insufficient to do so. If he/she was lent KRW 10 million, the principal shall be immediately repaid after using only five to six months, and the interest shall be paid at 5% per month.”
However, the Defendant had already been operating a restaurant from around 2009, and was unable to pay a higher interest rate of 10% per month on the borrowed money from the branch at the time of opening the business, and even if the Defendant borrowed additional money from the victim, he/she only thought to use it in the “refluence” of the borrowed money.