However, each of the two years from the date of the final judgment against the Defendants.

Defendant

A On March 14, 2012, the same year was sentenced to imprisonment for six months with prison labor for fraud and two years with prison labor for probation in the assistance of the Changwon District Court.

9.24. The judgment became final and conclusive.

1. On June 15, 2012, the Defendants’ co-principal Defendants: (a) at the J hotel coffee shop store store store store in Changwon-si, Changwon-si I, and (b) Defendant B, the victim G, “A signed an underwriting contract with K and paid a down payment; (c) may impose a large amount of money upon the agency to be supplied with goods from K and operated the agency; and (d) Defendant A, as a security deposit for an agency contract, provided goods to the victim and received money as a security deposit for the agency contract with K, prepared and issued a goods supply contract and a deposit certificate to the effect that “A signed an underwriting contract with K and paid a large amount of money.”

However, there was no fact that Defendant A entered into an underwriting contract with K at that time, and there was no intention or ability to take over K due to lack of certain revenues or assets, and Defendant B had the intent to use the above money as a successful bid price for the housing owned by Defendant B, and even if the money was received from the victim, there was no intention or ability to supply goods by concluding a contract with the victim with K agency with the victim.

Nevertheless, the Defendants conspired to induce the victim as above and received 20 million won as the security deposit for K agency contract in the same place from the victim.

2. Defendant B made a false statement to the effect that, around August 6, 2012, Defendant B would supply kimchi by operating a factory if he lends electricity of KRW 3 million to the victim G, because he was unable to produce kimchi due to the smuggling of the electricity of the N Farming Cooperative.

However, even if the defendant borrowed money from the victim, it is not the purpose of paying the delinquent electricity tax of the above farming cooperative.