except that the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for four years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

(e).

The Defendant is operating a salt farm of a total size of 49,644 square meters (15,00 square meters) with the trade name, “A salt farm,” in Jeonnam-gun, Shinan-gun.

1. Commercial inducement;

A. The Defendant: (a) introduced the victim(s) at F’s house located in the newannam-gun E; (b) induced the victim by using the fact that the victim was significantly low in thinking and judgment ability; and (c) had the victim work in the Defendant’s salt farm; and (d) had the victim pay wages normally.

Therefore, the Defendant, at F’s house around April 1996, told the victim “at our house, frighting to drink and return money if you go to do so,” and frighted the victim as if he would normally pay wages, and then frighted the victim to the Defendant’s house located in Nanannam-gun G and put the victim under de facto control until May 2014.

Accordingly, the defendant enticed the victim for profit-making purposes.

B. The Defendant: (a) discovered the victim from the passenger ship terminal near the passenger ship terminal located in Simpo-si in Simpo-si; (b) induced the victim by using the victim’s thinking and judgment ability significantly low; and (c) had the victim work in the Defendant’s salt farm; and (d) had the victim pay wages normally.

Therefore, around April 198, the Defendant, at the vicinity of the above passenger ship terminal, she harshed the victim as “I will drink at our house and return money if I will do so,” and had the victim under de facto control from May 201 to May 2014.

Accordingly, the defendant enticed the victim for profit-making purposes.

2. Quasi-Fraud;

A. The Defendant’s quasi-Fraud against the victim D is the victim No. 1 A.

The victims, as described in the paragraph, are “to pay money if they have worked at our house.”