【2016 Highest 2930】

1. On December 25, 2015, the criminal defendant against the victim C was requested from the victim C to “a loan the purchase fund of KRW 1.3 billion for the site for the city construction project in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-do.”

The defendant shall calculate the amount of KRW 78 million on the face of the victim as 2% interest per month and lend the amount of KRW 1.3 billion for three months to the victim.

“.....”

However, even if the defendant received a prior interest from the injured party, he did not have any intention or ability to lend or arrange 1.3 billion won to the injured party and did not have any intention to use it as expenses.

Defendant deceiving the victim as above, and received a total of KRW 75 million from the victim on December 30, 2015, including KRW 10 million, and KRW 65 million on December 31, 2015, as well as KRW 75 million on December 31, 2015, from the victim to the deposit account in the national bank account in the name of the Defendant.

【2016 order 3324】

2. The Defendant against the victim D is a director of E Co., Ltd. (F2 stories, Songpa-gu, Seoul, at the location) for the purpose of real estate development, etc., and the victim D is the representative director of the same company.

A. On March 18, 2015, the Defendant called the victim in Seoul around March 18, 2015 and was well aware of the influence on the president of the Korea University.

At the same time with G, the president of the Korea University will be appointed as professor of the University taking into account the wife of the party.

section 3.

If the school development fund is sent to the payment of KRW 100 million, it will be delivered to the school through the school director, etc. and return KRW 100 million by receiving the support from G after one month.

“.....”

However, the G does not have any relation with the Korea University, and the Defendant did not have any intention or ability to appoint the victim as a professor of the Korea University, taking into account the wife of the victim, and did not have any intent or ability to return money even if the victim received money from the victim.

The defendant deceivings the victim as above, and thereby, is the victim.