[criminal record] Defendant B was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 8 months of imprisonment for fraud at the Daejeon District Court on April 18, 2013 and the judgment became final and conclusive on July 3, 2013.

[Criminal facts] Defendant A is the former owner of Daejeon-gu E, Daejeon-gu, and Defendant B is the actual owner of the above building due to F’s birth as a person in the name of the above building.

1. On November 5, 2010, the Defendants conspired with the victim G in the above building management office to request the construction business entity with a comprehensive construction license for the above main building to remodel the building and to undergo an inspection for the completion of the building. It is false to the effect that the Defendants would pay the construction cost of KRW 180,000 to the 18 households of the above building, if the interior works were to be carried out,” and the Defendant B prepared a written confirmation of payment for the above construction cost to the victim on November 12, 2010 and carried out as if they were capable of making payment.

However, the Defendants did not have the intent or ability to request remodeling works to a comprehensive construction licensee even if the damaged person is responsible for the interior works, and there was no intention or ability to pay construction costs to the victim.

Nevertheless, on December 15 of the same year, the Defendants, by deceiving the victim, entered into a contract for the standard construction works at the above location with the victim, and let the victim do the interior construction work and did not pay the cost of construction.

2. Defendant A

A. On December 25, 2010, the Defendant, even if having borrowed money at the above place, concluded that “I would immediately repay 1 million won by borrowing money,” inasmuch as I would not have the intent or ability to repay it, the Defendant obtained the delivery of KRW 1 million from the injured party and acquired it by deception.

B. On December 26, 2010, the Defendant, even if having borrowed money at the above place, is in the absence of the intent or ability to repay it, the Defendant’s director cost of H residing in 301.