A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

Punishment of the crime

From October 2008, the Defendant came to know that the Victim E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim bank”) from around 2009, when submitting documents related to the pre-paid gold (tentative) paid to the employees of entertainment establishments, such as the pre-paid loan, to the owners of entertainment establishments in Gangnam-gu (hereinafter “the victim bank”) around October 2009, the Defendant provided the victim bank with the pre-paid loan (tentatively called Maaling loan) to the owners of entertainment establishments in Gangnam-gu.

However, at the time, the Defendant transferred entertainment taverns from Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government to the said C building, and lent approximately KRW 3 billion from other persons, used them for the extension and remodeling of the entertainment tavern building. The Defendant was responsible for enormous interest, and the Defendant instructed creditors to pay for the shortage of funds, such as demanding repayment of debts, and even if the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to pay for the loan even if he received a marina loan from the victim bank, the Defendant made a false document related to the prepaid money, and submitted it to the victim bank for the purpose of receiving the loan.

Accordingly, on or around December 31, 2009, the Defendant prepared a false prepaid document equivalent to KRW 310,000 (the amount of each prepaid payment shall be KRW 130 million, G 10,000,000,000 won, G 180,000,000 won, and H80,000,000), under the presumption that the Defendant was paid the prepaid payment in spite of the fact that the Defendant had not received the prepaid payment in the said entertainment drinking house (including the Defendant himself/herself, and H) as if he/she had not received the prepaid payment in the said entertainment drinking house, and was issued KRW 50,00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 from January 1, 2010.

In addition, even after the end of March, 2010, the Defendant is the person who received the prepaid payment even though K, L, M, and N did not have received the prepaid payment.