1. Fraud;

A. On July 29, 2009, the Defendant against the victim C may receive a high profit within a week if the Defendant’s omission in the E Hospital Hospital located in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu D invested the Defendant C in money for the used car export business.

A false statement was made.

However, the fact was that the defendant's omission was not engaged in the export business of used cars, and it was thought that it was used for hospital costs by receiving money from the injured.

Defendant (hereinafter “Defendant”) deceiving the victim as above and under the pretext of the above-mentioned investment from the injured party, 5,020,000 won around July 29, 2009; and

8.6. Minority: 6,210,000 won, and the same year.

9.8. He received KRW 2,000,000 in total and acquired KRW 13,230,000.

B. Fraud against the victim F (1) on March 8, 2016, the Defendant extended the victim’s house located in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Seoul Metropolitan Government Seoul Metropolitan Government with the amount of KRW 5 million from the victim’s house “on the part of the Plaintiff’s house” to the victim within one week, if the Plaintiff borrowed the money to the Plaintiff.

The phrase “the phrase was false.”

However, the defendant did not have any intention or ability to pay money within the agreed time limit because he did not have any property or income.

Nevertheless, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim as above; (b) by deceiving the victim; (c) obtained KRW 1,800,000 from the victim on March 8, 2016; and (d) obtained KRW 3,000,000 from the Defendant’s H’s account in the name of H, the Defendant acquired KRW 4,80,000 in total from the victim to the Defendant’s account in the name of H.

(2) The Defendant: (a) around March 12, 2016, No. 1-20

B. (1) At the same place as referred to in paragraph (1), the victim will operate the restaurant in combination with the money loaned by the victim as above, "at the principal place of the restaurant, with the amount of KRW 20 million as its partner deposit and operate the restaurant in combination.

“The phrase “ was false.”

However, the facts are that the defendant received the above money from the injured party, and the defendant did not enter into a lease contract with the restaurant, and the restaurant is operated in the same manner with the injured party.