On March 27, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of six months of imprisonment for fraud at the Seoul Eastern District Court, and on June 3, 2015, the judgment became final and conclusive.

The Defendant, at the 3rd floor of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City D D Building, operated “E” (hereinafter “E”), and operated “A company G with limited liability agricultural company” (hereinafter “G”) in the former Bukan-gun F, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and purchased farmland at a container and sold it in a wurging manner, and the victim H was employed as a telecomter in E.

The Defendant employed the elderly victim aged 67 years old at the time as a telecom, and sold the land I (hereinafter “I land”) on February 10, 2012 to the victim of the former Northwest-gun, North Korea (hereinafter “J land”), and received the purchase payment on February 20, 2012, respectively, by selling the J land (hereinafter “J land”). On March 20, 2012, the “O” in the bill of indictment in the Northwest-gun, North Korea-gun, North Korea-gun is a clerical error. < Amended by Act No. 11318, Mar. 3, 2012>

In order to sell the land located in the Republic of Korea (hereinafter “K”) and to receive part of the purchase price and use it as the company’s operating expenses, etc., the victim recommended the victim to purchase the land of 1,789 square meters in the area of not less than two times the above K’s price, and the land of 1,143 square meters in the area of 1,143 square meters in the previous Northwest-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, North Korea (hereinafter “N land”), but the victim could not obtain a loan any longer because he/she could not obtain a loan by purchasing several lots of land as above.

1. On April 4, 2012, the Defendant reversed a purchase and sale contract for the land to the victim at the E office, and converted the money that was partially paid into the purchase price for the land into the NE purchase price.

In addition, while allowing the payment of the purchase price, the person who borrowed the loan will pay the purchase price instead of the company.

The phrase “ makes a false statement.”

However, at the time of fact, the defendant had no record of concluding a special sales contract with the victim, and it was difficult for the company to take the circumstances due to financial aggravation, instead of the victim.