[criminal records] On September 14, 2017, the Defendant was sentenced to five years of imprisonment for a violation of the Act on the Regulation of Similar Receiving Acts at the Seoul Southern District Court, which became final and conclusive by serving the Defendant around that time on May 18, 2018 by the Supreme Court’s dismissal ruling by the appellate court.

[2] The Defendant, as the representative of C Co., Ltd. which professes a business entity of copper (dong), electric power resource, and investment, was under trial of this case, such as violation of the Act on the Regulation of Similar Receipt of Case No. 91, Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2017 Gohap 91, Seoul Southern District Court on May 12, 2017, the Defendant was present as a witness of the above Defendant, D, and E, and was notified of the right to refuse to testify at the court of Seoul Southern District Court 309, Seoul Southern District Court Decision 386, May 12, 2017.

(1) The Defendant “A witness shall have instructed Defendant D to perform any of his duties.”

In the examination of Defendant D’s defense counsel, “I do not know at all about the preliminary record, but did not know about the low-income duties.”

In addition, I first come to the position that it would not be possible to instruct or instruct the proposal because it first comes to how the similar receipt would be received.

(2) It is necessary to give testimony as follows: <2> "I do not have any such fact."

“I cannot do so in the examination of Defendant D’s defense counsel.”

(3) A witness shall give testimony to Defendant D on any ground that he/she is a financial director.

In the examination of Defendant D’s defense counsel, “this case itself is not a position to offer.”

“The testimony was made.”

However, the defendant, as the only internal director of the corporation C, directly approves the disbursement resolution as the representative, and invested money.