A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

1. Around October 2013, the Defendant borrowed KRW 25 million: (a) on the Defendant’s house located in the Defendant’s office located in the racing-si, the Defendant had the Victim D with D with a CE store work; (b) on the part of the Defendant’s office located in the Defendant’s office located in the racing-si, and (c) on the part of the Defendant’s business, it is necessary to move on and off the vehicle before carrying out the business; and (d) on the other hand, the Defendant borrowed money to purchase a friendly vehicle; and (c) on the other hand, the Defendant would have borrowed money to purchase a friendly vehicle

However, even if the defendant borrowed money from the victim, he did not have the intention or ability to repay it.

Around October 21 of the same year, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, received KRW 25 million from the Defendant’s office as the borrowed money from the Defendant’s office, on or around October 21 of the same year.

2. On March 201, 2014, the Defendant borrowed KRW 3 million from the Defendant’s home located in Seocho-si, Seocho-si, the Defendant loaned money to the victim D and received the vehicle from the Defendant at the Defendant’s home located in Seocho-si, Seocho-si, the Defendant provided that the Defendant would repay the money borrowed prior to the sale of the vehicle.

However, even if the defendant borrows money from the victim, he did not have any intention or ability to sell the money by selling it.

As above, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received 3 million won as the borrowed money from the Defendant’s house, who is difficult to do so from the victim.

3. On March 201, 2014, the Defendant borrowed KRW 2 million from the Defendant’s office located in the Defendant’s office located in Seocho-si, Seocho-si, to pay KRW 2 million with the money borrowed earlier.

The term "assumed" was referred to.

However, even if the defendant borrowed money from the victim, he did not have the intention or ability to repay it.

The Defendant, as above, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 2 million from the Defendant’s house as a loan from the Defendant’s office around that time.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each of the defendants;