On September 7, 2010, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment with prison labor at the Jeonju District Court for fraud, and the said judgment was finalized on November 20, 2010. On May 23, 2012, the Jeonju District Court sentenced six months of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act, etc., and the said judgment became final and conclusive on September 21, 2012.

1. Fraud against victim D;

A. On March 17, 2010, the Defendant is urgently required to post a telephone to the victim D at the Saemangeum Environment Association office located in the Donsan-gu Donsan-si, Seoul Special Metropolitan City on March 17, 2010.

If a person lends KRW 10 million, he/she shall obtain a loan and repay it within a week.

“...”

However, in fact, the defendant was unable to operate the defendant because of accumulatedness, and the defendant and E corporation did not have any property to be provided as security at financial institutions, and it was difficult to obtain additional loans due to the fact that it had already been granted credit loans equivalent to KRW 20 million at financial institutions. Therefore, the defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay even if he borrowed money from the victim.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received KRW 10 million from the victim to the bank account in the name of the Defendant on the same day as the previous North Korean bank account in the name of the Defendant.

B. On April 1, 2010, the Defendant told the victim D to have a telephone at the coffee shop located in the Ysan-gu, Ysan-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City on Apr. 1, 2010, that “if the Defendant lends KRW 12 million to the victim, he/she will complete payment to the above KRW 10 million prior to receiving the loan.”

However, the fact was that the defendant operated the corporation E was in a difficult condition due to accumulation of deficit, and the credit loans applied to financial institutions had been rejected, so the defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay the loan even if he borrowed money from the victim.

Nevertheless, the defendant deceivings the victim as above and is the same day as that of the victim.