Around December 2009, the Defendant knew that C suffered monetary damage equivalent to KRW 820,000,000,000 from D, the Defendant: “In fact, the Defendant was from the prosecution investigator, who may trace D’s financial flow, and may assist the recovery of damage.” The Defendant accessed the victim C.

1. On June 1, 2010, the Defendant: (a) at the coffee shop in the Fridge E in Anyang-si, Annyang-si, Annyang-si, Annyang-si, the Defendant: (b) planned to leave the victim C and G to a convalescent hospital the eight-story officetels located in H at the Gyeonggi-si; (c) the Defendant would assist the Defendant in doing so; (d) as the prosecution investigator, the Doers would be called the State Armed Forces; and (e) the Defendant would return KRW 60 million to the Plaintiff within two months after the progress of the construction; and (e) even if the principal is erroneous, the principal will be repaid.”

However, the Defendant was not a prosecutory investigator, and the Defendant was not aware of the plan and design of the construction work of the above convalescent hospital at the time when he was employed by I, but did not know of the previous construction work progress, such as removal of the officetel, and the future plan. Since the Defendant did not completely prepare for the project, such as business registration, funds, human resources, equipment, etc., necessary to carry out the above interior work, the above construction work could not be returned within 2 months, and the Defendant owned 30% of the shares of the land in ASEAN with no certain occupation or income at the time, and owned 30% of the shares of the land in ASEAN, but this was almost little economic value due to seizure around February 2009, and there was only a pecuniary claim against the Defendant and her wife, which was jointly owned by her wife, and thus, it cannot return the principal or profit by carrying out the above interior work.