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

Punishment of the crime

Defendant and C, along with C on June 201, conspired with C to use the funds for incorporation in installments after borrowing 100 million won from the victim E, who was aware of the fact that C was to establish a corporation by making the Defendant a representative director as a corporation, and a corporation as a director at the coffee shop located in Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Geumcheon-gu, Geumcheon-gu, Seoul.

Around June 12, 2011, the Defendant conspiredd with C to the effect that “A shall pay interest and principal after the registration of incorporation if C calls to the victim on the part of F, and lends its capital to F, the Defendant would have to pay the interest and principal after the establishment of the corporation.”

However, since the defendant and C have borrowed 100 million won from the victim as the name of the establishment registration of the corporation, they have no intention or ability to use it as the fund for the establishment even if they have borrowed 100 million won from the victim.

Around June 13, 2011, the Defendant, in collusion with C, by deceiving the victim as such, and acquired the victim by transfer from the victim to the Agricultural Cooperative (G) account in the name of the Defendant, KRW 90 million, KRW 10 million, and KRW 100 million in total, from the Agricultural Cooperative (H) account in the name of the Defendant.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on details of transactions by passbooks;

1. It is inevitable to sentence a sentence in light of the fact that the victim suffered considerable damage to the money by the act of the defendant for the reason of sentencing under Article 347 (1) of the relevant Act concerning the crime, and Article 30 of the Criminal Act, and the victim did not recover from the damage.

However, considering the fact that the defendant has no particular criminal history of the same kind, the person who led the deception of E in the overall case of this case appears to be C, the actual amount of profit is deemed to be C, and the defendant recognized his criminal facts and divided it, the punishment shall be determined.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.