A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant, around September 2009, in E-office operated by the victim D in Chuncheon City around the end of September 2009, intends to take over the victim's business from G amusement points in Chuncheon City F before the victim's entertainment points and perform funeral services.

It is necessary to lend KRW 26 million to be used as security deposit and operating funds, with the loan and the transfer obligation, and shall be repaid without paying KRW 1,500,000 per month for every five years from the following month.

1. As seen, the Plaintiff made a false statement to the effect that the Plaintiff was “.”

However, the defendant had been liable for 300 million won at the time, and the victim has already been liable for 63 million won, but there was no property, and even if profits have been earned by operating the main office, there was no intention or ability to repay the debt to the victim.

The Defendant received 26 million won from the injured party for the purpose of borrowing money from the seat.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each payment letter, certificate of seal impression (A), each letter, certificate of transfer verification, verification of liquidity transactions, inquiry of details of liquidity transactions, process of lending and borrowing contract, and copy of examination protocol of witness examination;

1. Relevant legal provisions on criminal facts, Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act on the selection of punishment, and the choice of imprisonment [The defendant and his defense counsel acknowledged the loss of the tea, but there was no deception since the victim anticipated the risk of impossibility of repayment at the time.

The argument is asserted.

According to evidence, the defendant and the victim developed from the entertainment station operated by the defendant in 2008 to the first annual relationship. On September 2009, the loan of KRW 26 million was made at the end of the day of September, 2009. The defendant already borrowed approximately KRW 63 million from the damaged person before the loan of this case. The victim knew that there was no special income other than the main revenue at the time of the loan, but the defendant additionally lent KRW 26 million to the injured person, and the defendant was actually the injured person.