A. 1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles with respect to fraud of KRW 300 million against the victim J. (A) Defendant A’s victimJ stating to the effect that “If only land is purchased, it is certain that Hmmo Park, a foundation, will be an administrator of public graveyard, etc. when land is sold only,” deceiving the victim J is not Defendant A but Defendant B, C, and D.

B) Defendant B merely served as a role of introducing the victimJ to Defendant A, C, and D, and it is the Defendant A, C, and D to make a substantial proposal and negotiation with respect to a loan of KRW 300 million. Defendant B did not participate in a meeting that was held in the coffee shop located in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on November 2007.

Defendant

D There is no fact of conspiracy with Defendant A, B, or C.

2) In relation to the crime of fraud of KRW 30 million against the victim G (Defendant B) (hereinafter “instant project”) with respect to the victim G, the victim G is the Hu Park project (hereinafter “instant project”) that is an incorporated foundation from Defendant B.

(3) In relation to the crime of fraud of KRW 70 million on April 9, 2010 against the victim G, the said corporation borrowed money from U as a representative director of the said corporation, rather than borrowing money from Defendant A and B, in connection with the crime of fraud of KRW 70 million against the victim G.

4) There was no fact that the victim J had the victim JJ sign a joint and several surety in relation to fraud (defendant A and B) on March 20, 2008 against the victim J.

2. Determination

A. 300 million won fraud against the victim J. 1 on the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles is limited to 300 million won.