(b) the defendant;

around April 29, 2014, the Defendant invested approximately KRW 780,000,00 from the construction cost to the H building located in Gyeonggi-gun G (hereinafter “H”). In the case of a lien, which is a secured claim against the above construction cost, the security right holder, and in the case of a lien, the company specializing in the 26th Asset-Backed Securitization Co., Ltd. filed against the Defendant I Co., Ltd., the Defendant was sentenced to the Plaintiff winning the lawsuit for confirmation of non-existence of lien 13047, and the judgment became final and conclusive on February 19, 2014, even if the above security right holder could not claim the lien against the said security right holder, the Defendant could receive KRW 70,000 from the victim J. 1 to 200,000,000 from the victim J. 40,000,000,000,000 from the victim J. 200,000.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant’s confession in court;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint;

1. Provisions of Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, and selection of punishment by imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The grounds for sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, including the observation of protection and observation, are as follows: (a) the principal sentence is set in the basic sphere of general fraud 2 types (100 million to 500 million) (1 to 4 years) on the sentencing guidelines; and (b) the enforcement is postponed on the grounds that the victim did not want punishment by mutual consent.

[The charge] On July 18, 2013, the Defendant needs to pay the victim D with a loan obligation for the registration of the establishment of a collateral security right, which is closed on this commercial building in order to purchase money to be used as a personal business fund and the commercial building located in the Bupyeong-gu Incheon, Bupyeong-gu, Seoul.

The purport is that the loan of KRW 100 million shall be repaid ten days after the loan.