The defendant is the representative director of (P) F, who is an enterprise such as cable broadcasting, film production, etc., and the actual operator of (P)G, a corporation specializing in rice production in Vietnam, and the actual operator of (P)G.

1. On July 20, 2010, the Defendant stated to the effect that, at the above (ju) E office located on the second floor of the H building in Gangnam-gu Seoul, the Defendant would repay the amount up to October 31, 2010 if the Defendant borrowed KRW 50,000,000 to the victim J, the Defendant would register the amount as a director of the cable broadcasting company owned by the inside and acquire shares.

However, at the time of the closure of business, I had no intention or ability to pay the amount properly even if I borrowed money from the victim because it is difficult for the victim to perform the registration and acquisition of shares of the director because the substance of the company is not different. The defendant's operating company had no intention or ability to pay the amount properly because of economic difficulties, such as the overdue office rent and delayed payment of employee pay.

Around July 23, 2010, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, received KRW 50 million from the victim to the bank account in the name of the said State (E) under the name of the said State.

2. On July 2010, 2010, the Defendant stated that “In order to maintain the relationship with a native E E office, the Defendant would be an affiliate of the company run within the territory of Korea by the new K company (ju) to be an affiliate of the company.” The Defendant stated that the te office to exchange with the domestic company (ju) stocks at KRW 4,000 and registered as a director.”

However, there was no idea that K will exchange with (State) E shares even if it received shares from the victim at the time.

Around July 29, 2010, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim; and (b) transferred the shareholder’s name to KRW 40 million in the amount of KRW 40 million in the market price from the victim; and (c) acquired pecuniary benefits equivalent to KRW 40 million in the amount of KRW 40 million in the market price.

Summary of Evidence

1. The first time;