A) The director of the division of F and G agreed to receive money from the victim F and G as if they were capable of subcontracting some of the construction works, or as if they were capable of entering into a subcontract even though they did not actually receive orders by using the construction in a plan to receive E. However, around October 2007, the Defendant demanded the victim F to pay money by stating that “The head of the division would allow the victim F to carry out construction of structures, such as sewage pipes, retaining walls, etc., during the I Corporation construction work, which is located in the wife population H at the G time, by entrusting the victim F to perform civil construction work in the E, and that the Defendant could not receive any additional construction from the victim of the I Corporation on June 12 to July 15, 2006, because the Defendant received some of the construction works from the I Corporation during the period of construction in the contract (the period of construction in the contract) and could not receive any additional construction from the victim on July 15, 2006, as if there were no additional construction works, such as a retaining wall.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 6,00,000 in cash with three branches of three times, a sum of KRW 5,30,000 from October 2007 to April 201, as shown in the list of crimes in the attached Table, and acquired cash of KRW 153,00,00 in total from the victim F and the victim G, and obtained three soldiers, who are over KRW 540,00 in market value, from the victim to April 201.

2. Determination:

A. The burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial lies in the prosecutor, and the conviction should be based on the evidence of probative value that makes the judge not having any reasonable doubt that the facts charged are true, so long as there is no such evidence, it may be said that there is no such evidence.