If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

On April 25, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor and six months at the Seoul Central District Court for fraud, and the judgment became final and conclusive on June 25, 2013.

The defendant is a person who has operated a window in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C Prize from 106.

Around November 9, 2009, the Defendant entered into a real estate exchange agreement with the above sub-sale lease and D-owned land exchange agreement with a third party for the purpose of evading taxes or obtaining profits from price fluctuation between different market values, or evading restrictions on the regulation on the change of rights for the purpose of evading taxes or avoiding restrictions on ownership, and thus, if the Defendant intends to again enter into a contract with a third party on the said land to transfer the status of the contracting party or to a third party on the said land, he/she shall file an application for the registration of ownership transfer under the first contract entered into with the third party before entering into the contract, but complete the registration of ownership transfer by trade under the F name on December 4, 20

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the suspect interrogation protocol of the defendant by the prosecution (a statement that the defendant will be registered in the G future)

1. Application of the statutes referring to the eight pages of investigation records of a real estate exchange contract among documents attached to the written complaint;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Special Measures for the Registration of Real Estate and Articles 8 subparagraph 1 and 2 (2) of the Act on Special Measures for the Registration of Real Estate Selection for Crimes;

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

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Judgment on the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The alleged defendant did not have the intent to avoid tax imposition or to obtain profits based on price fluctuation between other market values, or to avoid the statutory restrictions that regulate changes in rights, such as ownership, only when concluding an exchange contract with H on behalf of H.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence revealed earlier, namely, real estate.