The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Punishment of the crime

On May 10, 2016, the Defendant stated that, at the Defendant’s house located in Ulsan-gun apartment, Ulsan-gun, and the Defendant’s house located in Ulsan-gun, 107 Dong 307, the Defendant stated that “The Defendant did not engage in simultaneous loans at any other bank than Hyundai Savings Bank, and only inquired about credit in HK Savings Bank and Eth-friendly Savings Bank, and there is no plan to proceed with the loan.”

However, on the same day, the Defendant was running simultaneous loans with HK Savings Bank and Ethy-friendly savings bank, and notified the above D of the fact that the Defendant was running simultaneous loans, the Defendant could not receive loans from the victim company, and the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay the loans even if he received money from the victim company as a loan.

Ultimately, the Defendant deceivings employees of the victim company as above and caused the employee in charge of the victim company to transfer the funds of KRW 35 million owned by the victim company to the agricultural bank account in the name of the Defendant.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the staff in charge of the victim company.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. The application of recording records and the statutes on credit transaction agreements;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 347 of the same Act concerning the crime, the selection of fines;

1. Penalty of a fine of four million won to be suspended;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act (100,000 won per day) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence is that the instant loan was made through a loan transaction broker through an Internet and telephone consultation. According to the telephone counseling contents at the time, the explanation that the employee in charge mainly rendered a concurrent loan approval may cancel the loan contract prior to the execution of the loan.