A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

Punishment of the crime

On May 28, 2014, the Defendant, as a person who operated “C”, which was an electronic cooperation company in China, concluded that “C” office located in the Nam-si of China, loaned 50,000,000 won (in case of conversion into KRW 163,00,000,000 at that time, approximately 81,50,000,000,000 won) to the victim D after three months, and made a false statement that “The Defendant would have to collect plastic waste generated from the company.”

However, in fact, the above company operated by the defendant had a large amount of loans of approximately 2 billion won at the time, but did not have the ability to repay the loans on the payment date of the above loans, and it was also unclear whether to guarantee the extension of the payment date, and there was no intention and ability to repay the loans even if the above loans are borrowed from the injured party, such as the failure to pay employee's wages and taxes due to the financial difficulties caused by the merger of factories.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim and being issued a note 50,000,000 Chinese currency from the damaged party, received a total of 90,000,000 Chinese currency 250,000 Chinese currency on June 5, 2014, and on June 6, 2014, obtained the delivery of the above bill ( approximately 146,70,000 won in Chinese currency) and acquired it by deception.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a certificate;

1. The pertinent legal provisions on criminal facts and Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act’s choice of punishment (conformatively including, but not limited to, the punishment of imprisonment) are not written, and the fact that the defendant did not reach an agreement with the victim is unfavorable.

However, the fact that the defendant recognized the facts charged and seriously reflects the facts charged, the defendant's financial difficulties increased in the course of normal management of the company, and the defendant seems to have caused the crime of this case, the defendant made efforts to recover damage, such as partially repaying the amount of damage, and the defendant made efforts.