However, each of the above defendants is against the defendants for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Defendant

A On March 12, 2009, the Seoul Central District Court was sentenced to two years of suspension of the execution of imprisonment for a crime of fraud at the Seoul Central District Court, and Defendant B was sentenced to one year of suspension of the execution of imprisonment for six months in the above court on the same day, and each of the above decisions became final and conclusive on March 20, 209.

Acheon-si has never established a relocation plan for the relocation of a tombstone, etc., which is in charge of the Si with respect to a common cemetery in the Yanan-si in the Yancheon-si, and therefore no funeral business entity could receive the construction right for the relocation of the cemetery from the Yanan-si.

Nevertheless, the defendants can be awarded the right to execute the above cemetery construction from the Yananan City, and therefore, they want to acquire money from the victims as if they could give a subcontract for the above construction work, by deceiving the victim D as if they were able to do so.

Therefore, at the office of Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City around May 2006, the Defendants made a false statement to the effect that “the victims have formulated a relocation plan for a memorial cemetery in Yancheon-si in Yancheon-si, and will give a subcontract for construction by granting the construction right.” Defendant B, upon Defendant A’s order, is expected to receive the right of construction for a memorial cemetery relocation project from the victim around September 19, 2006, and Defendant B, upon the victim’s telephone around September 19, 2006, was expected to receive the right of construction for a memorial cemetery relocation project in Yandong-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City. However, around September 22, 2006, the Defendants received KRW 30 million from the victim as the cost of construction for the road relocation project in the vicinity of the new town-dong, Chungcheongnam-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City.”

As a result, the Defendants conspired to obtain 33 million won from the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each prosecutor's office and police investigation protocol against the Defendants (including D/F statements)

1. Statement of D police statement;

1. A complaint;

1. A certificate of borrowing and a certificate of confirmation;

1. Each judgment.