1. On October 14, 2016, around October 14, 2016, the Defendant phoneed to the victim B on October 4, 2016 to “A” and to expand the company.

In order to secure land through an auction for the expansion of factory, it is called that the land is sold at auction if there is a shortage of auction price, and the land is sold at auction, and the money borrowed as security is paid to the injured party, and the above 45 million won was delivered from the injured party for the loan, and the land was returned to the injured party.

[2] On October 14, 2016, the Defendant called the victim B to secure the land through an auction once again for the relocation of the C-factory.

As the auction price is insufficient, it was falsely concluded that the land is sold once again, and the land is sold at a successful bid, and the land is borrowed as collateral."

However, in fact, the Defendant did not take over C without any special revenue or property at the time, and there was a debt equivalent to approximately KRW 320 million without any property at the time, and even if the above money was paid from the injured party, it was thought that it was used as the card price of the Defendant and the fund for the management of the company, not the land auction price, so there was no intention or ability to pay the money to the injured party.

On October 14, 2016, the Defendant received KRW 45 million from the damaged party, as the borrowed money, from the E bank account (F) in the name of D around October 14, 2016.

2. On June 13, 2017, the Defendant may purchase the number plate for business use of a vehicle if “65 million won” from the victim on or around June 13, 2017.

It has already borrowed KRW 45 million, which means that if you lend KRW 20 million to B in addition, they would purchase a license plate for vehicle use.

However, even if the defendant receives the above 20 million won from the injured party, he shall use it for the living expenses, such as the card price of the accused.