The defendant of "2015 Highest 3222" operates the E (State) which is a consulting company for overseas construction.

1. Around March 2013, the Defendant entered into a contract with the Republic of Korea for a construction project for the F, G, and Congo H H repair project, but not only did it have been unable to receive the advance payment from the Government of the Republic of Korea, but also did not have been confirmed when the advance payment would be paid. In November 13, 2013, the situation was unclear whether the Defendant could receive the project cost from the Government of the Congo by giving notice of the discontinuance of the contract to the E on the ground that the advance payment was not made.

Nevertheless, on February 15, 2014, the Defendant is running H construction projects together with G in the Democratic Republic of the Congo at the (ju) K office where the victim J in Gangnam-gu Seoul is the representative director.

If the Government of the Congo wishes to receive H construction cost, 50,000 won of the guaranteed premium will be paid, and 200,000 won is insufficient.

On February 2014, 2014, 4.5 million won can be repaid without a mold, because the government of the Congo has been paid 4.5 million won.

“The phrase “ was false.”

The Defendant, as seen above, by deceiving the Victim J, obtained KRW 200 million from the victim, as the loan money on February 18, 2014, from the victim, and obtained the money from the victim to the NAC Account in M.

2. On March 1, 2014, the Defendant: (a) at the same place as above 1. Paragraph 1, the victim J (“L export business”); (b) “The bio-business (L export business) in the bean Republic of Korea is a very significant interest.”

There have already been a lot of bio-business rights in other companies, and in order to back L business to us, it is necessary to pay to the Government of the Congo, and to pay one million won for the street business.

First of all, there must be a minimum of 500,000 dollars.

“.........”

However, in fact, the defendant did not have any intention or ability to grant the victim the right of export business because there was no fact that he had negotiated with the government-related parties of the Congo and L export business.

Nevertheless, the defendant.