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 two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

1. On August 2015, the Defendant: (a) borrowed money to the victim B at an infinite place; (b) “The Defendant would pay the interest from the loan to the said member if he/she lends the money to the said member because he/she is in need of the funds to be lent to the members of the fraternity in charge of his/her internal operation.”

The phrase “ makes a false statement.”

However, at the time of fact, the Defendant had not borrowed money exceeding KRW 100 million from June 2014 to the cause of the fraternity C, and the Defendant did not have any particular property or income at the time, so even if he borrowed money from the damaged party, there was no intention or ability to repay the money.

On August 27, 2015, the Defendant received KRW 10 million from the damaged person to the account in the name of D used by the Defendant, and from that time until April 5, 2016, the Defendant received a total of KRW 70 million under the same name, such as the previous list of crimes (1) from April 5, 2016.

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

2. On December 2015, the Defendant: (a) paid-in money fraud was normally constituted of KRW 10,000 per unit and KRW 1,00,000 per unit to the injured party B at an influence place; and (b) upon joining the three preceding units, the Defendant would pay-in money normally on the date by giving up 8,9,10 sequences and paying-in money on the date.

The phrase “ makes a false statement.”

However, at the time of fact, the Defendant, as a member of the fraternity organized by himself from September 2015, was unable to receive the timely payment from C who joined the 4th unit of the fraternity. While the Defendant was operating the fraternity in an abnormal manner, such as calculating that C’s payment was substituted for the fraternity, it was thought that C had subscribed to the previous fraternity and operated the fraternity. At the time, the Defendant did not have any particular property or income other than the above fraternity operation. Therefore, even if receiving the payment from the injured party, the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to pay the fraternity to the victim by operating the normal system.

The defendant.