However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

(e).

On August 12, 2011, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years in the Seoul Southern District Court for fraud, etc. on August 12, 201, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on August 20, 2011.

Criminal facts

The Defendant leased several farmland to the Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government and divided them into lots, installed plastic houses on each farmland, and subleted the said farmland to 66 persons from January 2006 to 199, by providing that the Defendant may receive commercial membership certificates (the right to preferentially apply for the sale of commercial buildings after redevelopment) in addition to the agricultural loss compensation and relocation expenses.

However, since the above greenhouses were established after December 30, 2005, which was the base date of the relocation measures (the base date of the application for the permanent membership status), they could not first file an application for the right to occupy commercial buildings granted by the SH Corporation as one of the livelihood measures for the leased farmers according to the expropriation of the development zone.

The Defendant leased several farmland in the Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government and divided them into lots, installed plastic houses on each farmland, and purchased plastic houses through G through G, and introduced the victim H who wants to obtain the right to occupy commercial buildings as compensation therefor.

On May 2007, the Defendant stated to the effect that “If he purchases two vinyls located in the F-Development Area, he would have the right to purchase a commercial building.”

However, the standard date of compensation for the said district is not possible to compensate for the permanent admission certificates, etc. with respect to the plastic houses installed after the date of December 30, 2005, and even if the victim purchases the plastic houses from the defendant, it is impossible for the defendant to receive compensation, and the defendant did not have the intent or ability to allow the victim to have the right to occupy the commercial

Nevertheless, the Defendant, in its possession, was a new bank account under the name of the Defendant in the name of the victim for the purchase price of the commercial subscription share certificates from the victim.