A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On January 21, 2015, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim D(D) operated by the victim C, which was located in C(D) at C(D) on the following occasions: “The Defendant borrowed five million won from D(D) on the condition of working in D(D).”

However, even if the defendant receives money from the injured party, he did not have any intent or ability to perform the work or repay the said money.

The defendant received five million won from the injured party to the Saemaul Treasury account (F) in the name of E, his/her father, who is his/her father on the same day.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. The loan certificate;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on trading specification lists;

1. Relevant Article 347 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Even though the reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence has a record of being punished 21 times as a fine for the same kind of crime, it is necessary to punish the defendant strictly in that he/she commits the instant crime.

However, the sentence shall be determined as ordered in consideration of all the sentencing conditions shown in the arguments of this case, such as the fact that the defendant reflects the defendant's mistake, the fact that the defendant agreed smoothly with the victim, the amount of damage, the fact that the defendant has no record of crime heavier than a suspended sentence, and the age, sex, environment, circumstances, and circumstances after the crime.