If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

On June 5, 2007, the Defendant, who is engaged in the business of manufacturing clothes, received KRW 35 million from the injured party under the pretext of the price for the supply of clothing from the injured party, on the ground that: (a) on June 5, 2007, the Defendant concluded that “E” office of the injured party C with D3 floors Seoul Jung-gu, Seoul, providing the injured party with KRW 50,000,000, as the price for the supply of clothing, although the Defendant did not have the ability to supply the clothing as of the promised date even if he was requested by C by the injured party for the manufacture of clothing.”

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's legal statement (as at the date of the second public trial, in the case);

1. Entry of the defendant in C in the three-time prosecutorial examination protocol against the defendant;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to C;

1. Written estimate or contract for production;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on a copy of passbook;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 347 of the choice of punishment;

1. Articles 70 and 69(2) of the former Criminal Act (Amended by Act No. 12575, May 14, 2014);

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the order of provisional payment;