The victim B is the lessor of the building 101, 803, Daejeon Pungdong-gu, Daejeon, and the defendant is the lessee of the above 803, and is engaged in real estate brokerage from around 2007.

On April 19, 2012, the Defendant entered into a lease contract with the victim's words "120,000 won" and the lease term "from April 1, 2012 to May 1, 2014, the Defendant established a pledge on a new bank with the amount of KRW 84,00,00,000 among the lease deposit claims at the Daejeon Daejeon Bank, with the creditor of the new bank (main bank at the Daejeon Daejeon Branch), and received a loan of KRW 70,00,000 from the new bank and paid to the victim.

Since then, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The location of money would be urgently needed to be used, and the lease contract will be terminated as the lease deposit would be refunded to the victim.”

However, as above, the right of pledge was established with respect to 84 million won among the claims for the return of the lease deposit with 120 million won as the creditor of the new bank, and when the defendant received the above lease deposit, the defendant delegated the above 84 million won loan to G law firm G at the request of the new bank with the authority to receive the lease deposit with respect to the part of the right of pledge established by the victim, and thus the defendant demanded to change the full amount of the lease deposit at the time of termination of the lease contract with the fact that the defendant suffered the fire extinguishing cost even though he was not entitled to receive the lease deposit for the part of the right of pledge established by the victim and the defendant was unable to memory the contents of the notice of the right of pledge. Even if all the lease deposit was received from the victim, there was no intention to pay the lease deposit to the new bank as the pledgee (the pledgee).

The Defendant is identical to this.