A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On December 14, 2016, the Defendant borrowed money to the victim B to pay the money in need of supply.

“Around February 15, 2016, after receiving KRW 4.5 million from the injured party as a loan, it was delivered on December 15, 2016 from the injured party as the loan, and around February 2017, the above victim “in China, it is thought that the trade company will rent the company, but the office rent cost is required to be additionally lent, and it would be repaid only once to KRW 4.5 million prior to borrowing.

“Around February 15, 2017, an amount of KRW 300,000 was granted as the borrowed money.”

In addition, from July 2017 to November 201, the Defendant, while operating the clothing trading company, failed to pay KRW 76 million to the “D” of the clothing manufacturing company operated by the victim. The Defendant was urged to pay the total amount of KRW 100 million, including the price of supply, borrowed money, and interest thereon, from the victim.

On January 9, 2018, the Defendant prepared a promissory note process certificate of KRW 100 million with the victim, the issuer, and the date of issuance as of January 9, 2018, with the purport that “the victim shall sell the apartment owned by him up to July 31, 2018 and receive a promissory note and receive a promissory note of KRW 100 million in return for the full repayment of KRW 100 million.” The Defendant issued the said promissory note to the victim, the issuer, and the date of issuance as of January 31, 2018.

However, in fact, the Defendant had a personal debt of KRW 150 million, and even in the above apartment house with approximately KRW 3.66 million in the market price, the lease deposit of KRW 265 million was established, and the right to collateral security 26 million was postponed, so even if the payment deadline is postponed, the Defendant did not have an intention or ability to pay KRW 100 million to the victim until the postponed change.

The defendant deceivings the victim as such, and thereby deceiving him.