[Criminal Justice] On September 24, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to a one-year suspended sentence of one-year imprisonment for fraud in the Daegu District Court’s Ansan Branch on December 4, 2009, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on December 4, 2009. On September 10, 2010, the Daegu District Court sentenced one year and eight months of imprisonment for fraud and the said suspended sentence was invalidated, and the execution of each of the said suspended sentence was terminated in the Daegu Prison on November 26, 201.

The Defendant, “2013 Highest 4558,” was living together with C, and became aware of C’s co-born victim D.

Around August 2012, the Defendant: (a) made a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant would benefit from the disposal of scrap metal emitted from E to the disposal of the scrap metal emitted from E” at least ten percent. There are 7 factories nationwide; and (b) would be subject to the right to process scrap metal in four out of the total amount.” The Defendant made a false statement to the effect that the Defendant would demand deposit and increase of the amount of money.”

However, even if the defendant receives money from the victim, he did not have any intention or ability to provide the victim with the right to manage scrap metal arising from E.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim and deceiving the victim from June 2, 2012 to January 24, 2013, received a total of KRW 329.6 million, in total, from 33 times as shown in the attached Table 1, in the name of expenses, etc. related to the right to collect scrap metal, as shown in the attached Table 1, from the victim’s account under the name of the Defendant.

around May 2012, the Defendant “2013 Godan8491” told the victim F to the effect that “at the same time worked in E and her relative to E” was working in the instant coffee shop near Yeongdeungpo-gu, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul. The Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “at the same time worked in E and her relative to E. The Defendant changed the right to operate the scrap metal business generated from E through her relative.”

However, even if the defendant receives money from the victim, he did not have any intention or ability to provide the victim with the right to manage scrap metal arising from E.

Nevertheless, the defendant is identical to this.