However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. Fraud;

A. On September 2013, 2013, the Defendant is located in the position of the victim C in the mutual influent restaurant located in Gangseo-si, Gangseo-si.

If the company includes investment funds for about two years, it shall invest in private equity funds, etc., and make profits if any, 7 to 9% profits if any. The principal shall be guaranteed, and it shall be stable with interest received every month.

In order to deposit KRW 100 million into a passbook, it is expected to make an investment in lieu of the Bank of Korea.

The phrase “the phrase was false.”

However, in fact, the "YAD" is substantially referred to as "YAD", and even if the defendant has received the investment money from the injured party, he/she did not have an intention or ability to grant profits by making an investment or to return the principal.

The Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 100 million from the national bank account (Account Number: E) in the name of the Defendant under the pretext of investment from the victim.

B. On November 12, 2013, the Defendant sent a telephone to the said victim at a non-place of Daejeon (Seoul) or lower level, and “A bank is similar to bank interest ditches if the said victim was placed in Switzerland options” and the bank can collect interest at an annual rate of 2% per annum in December and January, if the interest was invested at the end of the year, on the one-year basis. As such, the Defendant was able to receive interest at an annual rate of 10 million won in investments.”

However, even if the defendant received money from the injured party, he did not have the intent or ability to invest in the Stockholm option.

The Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, was transferred KRW 10 million to the Agricultural Cooperative Account (Account Number: G) in the name of Defendant F, under the pretext of the Stockholm option investment from the victim.

(c)

On May 21, 2014, the Defendant posted a telephone to the victim at a non-permanent location of Daejeon (Seoul) and falsely concluded that “The Defendant purchased it and then sold it at the time of six months, she would make a lot of profits, which would have been KRW 10 million investment year.”

However, even if the defendant receives the investment money from the damaged party, he/she has purchased commercial buildings.