If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

[criminal records] On March 28, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for six months at the Seoul Western District Court for fraud on December 24, 2014, and the judgment became final and conclusive on December 24, 2014, and the crime 7 of the above criminal facts appears to be a clerical error in the court below’s ruling, taking into account the time of institution of public prosecution, the time of pronouncement of the judgment, the timing of other crimes in the criminal facts, etc.

[Criminal facts] The defendant is a person who is in office as a director in-house director.

The Defendant, around 14:00 on October 22, 2012, issued the right to operate a restaurant (on-site restaurant) located in the vicinity of Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, to the victim E ( South and 66 years of age) (hereinafter “Seoul Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, the site of reconstruction work, which first takes place at the site of the reconstruction work, 3 million won in the site of the down payment.

1. As seen, the Plaintiff made a false statement to the effect that the Plaintiff was “.”

However, the defendant was not the actual right holder at the reconstruction construction site, and even if he receives the down payment from the injured party, he did not have the intention or ability to grant the right to operate the restaurant.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the complainant, was issued on October 25, 201 by the complainants.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Partial statement of witness G;

1. A contract to conclude a copy of a bankbook, a letter, or an on-site restaurant;

1. Previous convictions: Inquiry into criminal records, investigation reports (former and attachment of the previous judgments), and application of the same criminal records and other Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 347 of the same Act, the selection of fines concerning the facts of a crime;

1. Subsequent to Article 37 of the Criminal Act dealing with concurrent crimes: Provided, That Article 39 (1) shall apply;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The defendant and defense counsel's assertion of the defendant and defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order asserts that the defendant did not receive the above money as a down payment of the restaurant operation right, but the victim voluntarily used the money as activity expenses, and that there is no fraudulent intent nor deceiving the victim.

According to evidence, ① victims are victims.