[Criminal record] On February 23, 2011, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of ten (10) years for criminal fraud at the Seoul Southern District Court, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on March 3, 201.

[2] The defendant is a person who has been engaged in the sales of commercial buildings by delegation of the sales agency business affairs from the private person of the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, the Nam-gu, and the non-party who has been engaged in the sales of commercial buildings from April 7, 208.

On August 22, 2008, the Defendant terminated the sales contract for the above shopping mall E, F, and G at the above shopping mall office, and embezzled the contract deposit amount of KRW 37,77 million owned by the victim from the K bank account in the name of the Defendant’s wife, which was returned to the J bank account in the name of the Defendant’s wife, and used it for the personal purpose such as living expenses, etc. around that time.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to K and H;

1. A investigation report (Attachment of a detailed statement of transactions in the I Account), a letter of commitment, a receipt, details of transactions in the passbook, a contract for sale of passbook, details of transactions in the passbook, a criminal investigation report (D Company L), and details of transactions in passbooks (suspects of D Company);

1. Previous convictions in judgment: (A) a response to inquiries, such as criminal history, etc., the application of the text of the Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2010 High Court Decision 3862, and the application of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes for printing inquiries

1. Relevant legal provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 356 and 355 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of criminal facts;

1. After Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the reason for sentencing provided for in Article 39 (1) of the same Act;

1. Prosecutor’s opinion - One year of imprisonment;

2. Determination of sentence - The defendant is unable to recover from damage for a long period of six months (the defendant's contact address was changed and his/her whereabouts were unknown). However, this is due to the fact that the defendant who was accused on April 13, 2009 was investigated by an investigative agency on two occasions on June through July 2, 2009, and that considerable time has elapsed since his/her whereabouts were unknown, etc., and the defendant would pay the amount of damage at present.