A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

Punishment of the crime

On February 14, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to 10 months of imprisonment and 2 years of suspended execution at the Incheon District Court on February 14, 2013, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on February 22, 2013.

On May 12, 2008, at the defendant's office located in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, the defendant made an investment in the hotel and casino in Madao, and it is now difficult to do so. When he/she lends money, he/she made a false statement to the effect that he/she shall divide 50% of the principal into profits accrued at the place and divide it once a week every four months, and that the principal shall be repaid after four months.

However, even if the defendant borrowed money from the victim, the defendant did not have the intent or ability to make a profit by making an investment or to make a repayment within the due date.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, was transferred to the post office account in the name of the Defendant for the purpose of borrowing KRW 15.9 million, including the sum of KRW 1 million on May 12, 2008 and KRW 15.9 million on May 22, 2008.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness E, F and G;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Each police statement of E and F;

1. A complaint;

1. A copy of a loan certificate and a copy of a statement of payment;

1. A copy of each bankbook and a detailed statement of financial transactions (A and post offices);

1. Each investigation report (any criminal record related to a suspect and attachment of written judgments);

1. Investigation reports (limited to previous convictions and attachment of written judgments);

1. A previous conviction in the judgment: In the inquiry letter, the defendant and the defense counsel's argument that the defendant and the defense counsel received 15.9 million won in the judgment of the defendant and the defense counsel are not borrowed money, but the defendant asserted that the defendant's investment money was invested in the multi-level company of H through the defendant and denied the crime of defraudation, but the victim stated that the defendant had consistently lent the above money to the defendant from the investigative agency, i.e., the following circumstances acknowledged by the above evidence, i., the victim stated that he/she had consistently lent the money to the defendant, and the loan amount and the date of maturity.