On April 30, 2015, the Defendant would pay the victim E with the amount of tax of KRW 40 million, including the amount of tax of KRW 671,00,000,000,000,000,000,000,0000,0000,000 won, and the amount of tax of KRW 671,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0000,000,0000,000,0000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000).

“The purpose of “ was to make a false statement.”

However, in fact, the defendant was registered as a bad credit holder due to the non-performance of financial obligations at the time, and was thought to use the right to collateral security created by the victim in the goods transaction, and did not have any intent or ability to transfer ownership by paying the agreed money with the victim.

The Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, had the victim establish the right to collateral with “the obligor, the mortgagee H, and the maximum amount of 100 million won,” each of the above real estate on the same day, thereby acquiring the Defendant’s pecuniary advantage (the appraised assessed amount of KRW 72,165,790 - the maximum amount of 45,000,00 = 27,165,790 won) equivalent to the value of the collateral that the Defendant may use as collateral to the H of the above real estate.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the accused by the prosecution (including a cross-examination of the E division);

1. Each report on investigation;

1. A certified copy of each other’s donation and a written confirmation [the Defendant] established the right to collateral security (hereinafter “the right to collateral security of this case”) in the judgment of the court below merely established the right to collateral security (hereinafter “the right to collateral security of this case”) under the agreement that he/she pays 25 million won to the victim on his/her behalf and directly pays 35 million won to the victim for the creation of the right to collateral security (hereinafter “the right to collateral security of this case”).