The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is that the Defendant is qualified as a intermediary agent for the victim in the instant case’s dwelling in the Defendant’s dwelling located in the same military F, i.e., the Victim E’s Go-gun, who had been on the early Jan. 2, 2016, in the military area of the Defendant’s Republic of Korea.

If the amount of 200 million won is paid as a security deposit, the amount of 200 million won or more may be kept in the hydroba, and the amount of 2-3 times or more of the amount may be sold to department stores, etc. and profits may be sold to them.

B. A false statement was made to the effect that “A loaning KRW 200 million to B, the principal shall be repaid until April 15, 2016, and interest KRW 100 million shall be paid until May 1, 2016.”

However, even if the Defendant borrowed money from the injured party, he did not think that the Defendant would have newly purchased the entire amount of softening with the money. At that time, the Defendant thought that most of them would have been used for the payment of the amount of softening expenses or personal debts purchased with the existing credit, and around that time, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to pay the principal and interest even if he borrowed money from the injured party, as the monthly interest on the loans of KRW 1.25 million in total in the name of the Defendant and the Defendant’s wife, approximately KRW 1 million in the monthly interest on the loans of KRW 225 million in the name of the Defendant and the Defendant’s wife, while the monthly interest on the loans of KRW 1.0 million in freezing and the monthly interest rate of KRW 500,000 in the Defendant did not reach KRW 500,000,000 per month.

On January 22, 2016, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, obtained a total of KRW 200 million from the victim to the Suhyup Bank account (G) account of the Defendant on two occasions from the victim.

2. Determination

A. As to the deception of the use of the borrowed money, the defendant has already secured the amount of the borrowed money to the victim, secured the amount of the borrowed money when the victim borrowed the money to secure the amount of the borrowed money, and additionally secured the amount of the borrowed money.