150,000,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

On February 23, 2011, the Defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Act on External Audit of Stock Companies in the Seoul Southern District Court on September 16, 201, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on September 16, 201. On May 3, 2013, the Seoul High Court sentenced two years and six months of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) in the Seoul Southern District Court, and the said judgment became final

On October 2008, the Defendant received money and valuables from G in the name of receiving KRW 150 million in cash solicitation from G in the name of receiving KRW 150 million in cash solicitation from G in the middle of the Seoul Central District Public Prosecutor's Office on October 23, 2008, and received money and valuables from public officials on the pretext of receiving KRW 150 million in cash solicitation and receiving KRW 150,000 in cash solicitation for the case or affairs handled by public officials in the middle of the Seoul Central Public Prosecutor's Office.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement of the witness K;

1. The entry of witnesses G and L in the third protocol of trial;

1. Each statement of witnesses M and N in the fourth trial records;

1. Entry in an investigation report (Attachment, such as a complainant's G,O, and a copy of the K passbook), a copy, etc. of the G foreign exchange bank passbook, a family relation certificate, and the current status of loan management; and

1. Previous records: Application of each Act or subordinate statute of a criminal investigation report (Attachment to written judgments), 10 highest order of 2097, 11No336, 11 highest order of 701, 12No194, and 12Do8157;

1. Article 111 (1) of the Attorney-at-Law Act applicable to facts constituting an offense and Article 111 of the Act on the Selection of Punishment;

1. The latter part of Article 37 and the former part of Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

1. Judgment on the assertion by the defendant and his defense counsel under the latter part of Article 116 of the Attorney-at-Law Act

1. The gist of the assertion is that the Defendant did not call G to have the person concerned with the prosecutor’s office, nor did he have received such a solicitation.

The defendant shall be G and a hotel at the time of the above facts constituting the crime.