1. On January 1, 2010, the Defendant against the victim C would give KRW 450,00 to 550,00 as the daily day of the week in which the Victim C, who was aware of in the course of performing the landscaping construction of E located in Namyang-si, Namyang-si, Namyang-si.

“.......”

However, in fact, the defendant thought that the money received from the above E-Landscaping work was used as the defendant's personal debt repayment, etc. In addition, the defendant was liable for approximately KRW 16 million, and the victim did not have any specific income or property. Therefore, even if the victim did not have any intent or ability to pay the work cost in full.

The Defendant, by deceiving the victim, had the victim do work for the above E-Landscaping work at around that time, and did not pay 1.6 million won work cost, thereby acquiring property benefits equivalent to the same amount.

2. Fraud against victim F;

A. On July 15, 2010, the Defendant: (a) from the headline of the trade name “H” operated by the Victim F in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City Nowon-gu, the Defendant left 300 girs of 300 girs from the Victim F.

This tree is 25,00 won per tree, which is 25,000 won per tree, and can be sold again in KRW 40,00.

After the purchase of this tree, the purport was that the purchase price for the purchase of the test tree is changed to “the price for the purchase of the test tree to remaining benefits from the sale.”

However, in fact, the Defendant decided to purchase the above pine trees in total of KRW 8,400,00 per 1gu, the owner of the above pine trees, and even if the Defendant received KRW 6,300,000 from the injured party as the purchase price of the above pine trees, 3,90,000 won among them was thought to be used for personal purposes, such as living expenses of the Defendant, and whether the said pine trees can be sold for KRW 40,000 per 1gu is also unclear from the injured party.