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

On September 29, 2011, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for violating the Trademark Act at the Seoul Central District Court on June 201, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on October 7, 2011.

On October 208, 2008, the Defendant stated that “The victim E, a person who well believed another person’s horse in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul, may lend money in order to be used as a security deposit for business promotion and the funds needed to be used as a security deposit,” and the Defendant may dispose of the real estate within the name of Gyeongbuk-gun F, so he/she may be paid off the money by disposing of it.”

However, in fact, the defendant did not own real estate in the name of the defendant in the Sung-gun F of the Gyeongbuk-gun, did not use the money borrowed from the victim to the business-related deposit, but is thought to use the money as the money for horse gambling. In the event that the victim is urged to pay from the victim, he did not pay the money late.

Nevertheless, the Defendant deceiving the victim as above, and 30 million won from the victim in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul to October 16, 2008, and 20 million won in cash around October 31, 2008, and acquired 50 million won in total from the victim in cash.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the accused by the prosecution (including the part concerning the statement of the E);

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Complaints of E preparation;

1. Each report on investigation;

1. Particulars of receipt of cash custody and account transactions;

1. A previous conviction: Application of a written inquiry and a written reply;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense. Article 347 (1) of the said Act

1. After Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 39 (1) of the same Act:

1. Person who has been specially mitigated in the mitigation area (-1 year) of Class 1 (less than 100 million won) of Class 1 of the Criminal Act (the scope of the recommended punishment) on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the suspended execution of the Criminal Act: The person who has received money by abusing the victim's prior mind (the decision of the sentence], and who has received money by deceptioned money;

in this respect.