On February 17, 2011, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment with prison labor at the Suwon District Court for a violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on April 28, 2011.

Around January 201, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that, at the time of the Defendant’s house, the Defendant was indicted for violating the Attorney-at-Law Act and was subject to a trial, and that there was no special revenue source, and that the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay the borrowed money from the Defendant D because he did not have any pentation owned by the Defendant’s father. Moreover, even though the Defendant’s father did not receive the treatment by hospitalization at the hospital, the Defendant did not have any money, “if the Plaintiff would have to perform the surgery immediately by making it available to the patient room among the E Hospital in Yancheon-si, the Plaintiff would sell the gate operated by his father later.”

Around January 22, 2011, the Defendant deceptioned the victim as above, and acquired 10 million won from the victim’s deposit account in the name of F to the deposit account in the name of F on January 23, 201, 4 million won to the deposit account in the name of the Defendant on January 23, 2011, 14930,000 won to the deposit account in the name of the Defendant on January 24, 2011, 9 million won to the deposit account in the name of the Defendant on January 31, 201, 3 million won to the deposit account in the name of the Defendant on February 10, 201, and around February 10, 201, 50 million won to the deposit account in the name of F on February 16, 2011.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. Each specification of transactions;

1. Application of each statute of the judgment;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act comprehensively including relevant provisions concerning the facts constituting an offense and the choice of punishment;

1. Determination as to the Defendant’s assertion under the latter part of Article 37 and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act dealing with concurrent crimes

1. The defendant received a total of 50,930,000 won from D, but he made a false statement to D as stated in the above criminal facts at the time, and belongs to D.