However, with respect to Defendant B, the same shall apply for one year from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

[criminal power] On September 8, 201, Defendant A was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for violating the Electronic Financial Transactions Act at the Seoul Central District Court on September 8, 201, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on September 16, 2011.

【Criminal Facts】

From October 2008, the Defendants: (a) from around D and E (the same body is the same company; and (b) Defendant A established the corporation E) induced investors while playing a sea-during role; and (c) Defendant B, while managing the passbook of each of the above corporations, was in charge of paying dividends upon receiving investment money.

The Defendants conspired to attract an investment to an unspecified number of unspecified persons, and Defendant A made a false statement on November 2008, stating that “The victim F is engaged in mechanical development projects making food waste from Company E to fertilizer, and dump truck leasing projects, and making an investment in money may gain a large profit. In making an investment, the Defendants may receive 5% of the dividend every day from the Trith day to the Frith day of every week, and 50% of the investment amount may be earned from profits if the month in which the investment was made.”

However, in fact, the defendants had the purpose of attracting victims as investors and receiving the introduction fee, and the above company did not have any way to pay dividends and profits agreed while continuing the business except that the expenses incurred in carrying out the fertilizer machine development project or dump truck rental business are not remaining if it pays the funds received from investors as office rents, management expenses, and customers' dividends.

Defendants received total of KRW 34,615,000,00 from the victim around November 20, 2008, KRW 1,100,000 around December 5, 2008, and KRW 21,415,000 around December 11, 2008, respectively.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Statement of the police officer concerning G (F);

1. Cash storage certificate;