When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

On June 1, 2009, the Defendant: (a) at a store where it is difficult to know the trade name in the Yangyang-si Yangyang-si Yangyang-dong Yangyang-si, the victim and D had the victims acquire a total of KRW 30,000,000,000 from L, under the pretext of the construction work, even if the victims purchased forest EF in the Gyeonggi-si EF, forest, forest, H, forest, forest, forest, I, forest, KJ, and forest from about 12,00,000 won were to be restored to its original state; (b) however, the Defendant made a false statement that “the construction work is to be done so as to ensure the construction of all houses at the ordinary level; and (c) caused the victims to acquire a total of KRW 38,00,000,000 from L, under the pretext of the construction work.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness N,O, P, C, and Q;

1. Part concerning L, N, or C of the police interrogation protocol against the accused;

1. Statement of the police statement regarding C;

1. A written confirmation (eight pages of evidence), a real estate sales contract (including attached Form);

1. Application of a transcript (152 pages of documentary evidence), a copy of a bankbook (13 pages of documentary evidence);

1. Relevant Article 347 (2) and (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 347 (2) of the Criminal Act and the choice of fines concerning criminal facts;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order cannot be changed due to the lack of permission for conversion of a mountainous district for sentencing. In the case of construction work, a punishment was imposed in consideration of the fact that the person acquired money as a construction cost without notifying the fact that it is not agreed with the victims, even though the person should restore the forest to the original state.