[criminal records] On October 22, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment for fraud at the Daejeon District Court on May 12, 2015. On December 20, 2017, the execution of the sentence was terminated in the Red Prison. On December 20, 2017, the Seoul Central District Court sentenced eight months of imprisonment for fraud and the judgment became final and conclusive on June 15, 2018.

[ criminal facts] The defendant is a representative director of D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "D") in the head of Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City building B building C, and the victim E is a person who has conducted real estate development business on behalf of the defendant when the defendant promoted business.

1. On January 14, 2016, the Defendant sold the right to sell in lots to H with respect to the F apartment G of the wife population in Yongsan-si, without authority, and received the down payment of KRW 30 million from H, the Defendant left the place where he/she would be subject to a complaint from H, and on March 8, 2016, at D office around March 8, 2016, if the Defendant would give the victim a refund of KRW 30 million to H, he/she would have the victim be forced to file a complaint. The mother received KRW 14 billion as the compensation for the orchard from the Sejong Si, and the mother has the right to franchis within the limit of KRW 7 billion, so it can be fully repaid.

“A false representation is made in the content.”

However, the defendant's mother did not have any intention or ability to repay even if he borrowed money from the damaged party because he did not receive 14 billion won as compensation for land from the Sejong City.

Nevertheless, the Defendant was transferred 15 million won to a deposit account (IJ) in the name of the Defendant on the same day from the victim.

2. On March 21, 2016, the Defendant called the victim at a Buddhist land and promoted an implementation project for constructing an apartment or commercial building by redevelopmenting the K in front of Busan City viewing.

It was false that the party made a request for remittance of design expenses, construction expenses, and authorization and permission expenses, as the party will have the party vicariously carry out the sales business.

However, the defendant has promoted the redevelopment project at the time.