1. On September 2012, the Defendant: (a) at a store operated by the victim D in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City (Seoul) on September 2012, the Defendant: (b) received the Defendant’s recommendation from the Defendant to receive KRW 1 billion the total sales right of the Seoul and the Gyeonggi-gu retail store, a business entity, in the store; (c)

Since the business outlook is very high, the Seoul and the Gyeonggi-do retail store will be about 200,00 if it will be lent KRW 500 million, which means that the inside interior interior interior interior interior construction right is given, the principal will be repaid after 4 months, and the interest at the bank interest rate will be paid.

However, the defendant did not have any particular property at that time, and his liabilities exceeded KRW 7-80 million, and at that time, the defendant continued to pay interest up to KRW 00,000 per month because he did not have any particular income, and the defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay the borrowed money even if he borrowed money from the victim because he did not have any intention or ability to receive the borrowed money from the victim because he did not have any other income and did not use it as a repayment for other obligations.

On October 10, 2012, the Defendant received KRW 400 million from the damaged party to the Agricultural Cooperative account of the Defendant under the pretext of the loan.

2. The Defendant around March 2013, at the E store located in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Seoul, and at the victim G who was introduced by the branch, paid KRW 100 million after two years from the payment of interest of KRW 2% per month for the loan of KRW 100 million.

“.......”

However, the defendant did not have the intent or ability to repay the borrowed money at the due date even if he borrowed money from the damaged person due to the circumstances such as the statement in Paragraph 1.

On August 6, 2013, the Defendant received KRW 100,000 from the damaged party to the Agricultural Cooperative account of the Defendant under the pretext of the loan.

In this respect.