On May 28, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment for fraud at the Seoul Northern District Court on June 5, 2009, and the judgment became final and conclusive on June 5, 2009, and completed the execution of the sentence on November 21, 2009.

On March 1, 2009, the Defendant, at the Defendant’s house located in the Homan Ho-si B, concluded that “The Defendant would first request the Victim C to import and sell meat in the U.S. and sell meat.”

However, even if the Defendant did not receive money from the injured party due to the absence of any particular occupation, he did not think of it for the purpose of using the money, and there was no intention or ability to return the money from the injured party due to the absence of any particular income or property.

Nevertheless, on March 24, 2009, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim; (b) received KRW 2.5 million from the victim’s account in the name of the Defendant or a national bank account in the name of the Defendant D on March 24, 2009; and (c) received the delivery of KRW 24 million in total from the victim on four occasions from around that time to December 28, 2009 by the same method as indicated in the list of crimes in the attached list of crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. A copy of bankbook;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Results of inquiry, results of search by prisoners, application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report on investigation (verification of recent same kind of force);

1. Relevant Article 347 of the Criminal Act and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act (including the fraud by taking place 1 through 3 of the list of offenses), each of the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment for each of them;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes (as to the re-crime Nos. 4 of the List of Crimes)

1. The latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Procedure Act: Provided, That the following circumstances are the reasons for the sentencing of Article 39(1) [Attachment 1-3] (which became final and conclusive in the table of crimes Nos. 1-3]; equity in the case where a judgment was rendered concurrently with the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act; and other Defendant’s age, occupation, sex conduct.