On September 21, 2011, the Defendant stated to the effect that “E” operated by the victim D (n, 54 years of age) in Pyeongtaek-si C, the Defendant would pay the victim (or her husband F at that time) the payment to the victim (or her husband F at the time) for an event, etc. promoting the products of small and medium enterprises.

However, in fact, the defendant had no intention or ability to pay the price properly even if he/she received an excessive work from the victim because he/she applied for individual rehabilitation and related procedures are being in progress around 2008, etc.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, etc. as above, had the victim deliver an excessive amount of KRW 3,444,00 to the event site in Incheon, and had the victim receive a delivery of an excessive amount of KRW 113,960,50 throughout 43 times from that time to November 15, 201, and acquired it by deception.

Summary of Evidence

1. The Defendant’s statement to the effect that “In spite of being supplied with work from September 21, 201 to November 15, 201, the Defendant had failed to pay KRW 113,960,50,00 for the payment of the price in spite of being supplied with work from around 43 times to November 15, 201.”

1. Legal statement of witness F;

1. Statement made by witnesses D in the protocol of the trial;

1. Transaction books, etc.;

1. Each investigation report at the delivery venue 1 (comprehensively taking account of the above evidence, the defendant's attempt to deliver a work to the publicity hall of the so-called type of events and receive the price to the victim. However, it seems that the delivery method is clearly aware that there is a high risk of not being properly paid the price, and there is no other means to pay the defendant the price in excess. Thus, the application of the law can be sufficiently recognized that there is a criminal intent to obtain the payment in excess of the price.)

1. Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act by virtue of the relevant legal provisions on criminal facts.