The defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,00,00,00 for the crime No. 2 as stated in the judgment, in 10 months of imprisonment with prison labor.

Punishment of the crime

[criminal power] On February 17, 2005, the Seoul High Court sentenced two years and six months to imprisonment for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud), etc., and completed the execution of the sentence on April 25, 2007. On May 28, 2010, the Seoul Central District Court sentenced six months to imprisonment for a non-prosecution crime, which became final and conclusive on June 5, 2010. On July 26, 2013, the Seoul Central District Court sentenced four months to imprisonment for a violation of the Illegal Check Control Act, which became final and conclusive on August 3, 2013, and on September 5, 2014, the said judgment became final and conclusive on November 13, 2014.

【Criminal Facts】

1. From March 2008 to April 2008, the Defendant, at the office of the Defendant in Gangnam-gu Seoul, issued a cash check with KRW 475 million under the name of the victim immediately on the payment day by discounting one sheet of KRW 500 million per unit number of G stock company issued by the Defendant to the victim F at the Defendant’s office located in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Seoul, to pay the cash check on the payment day. The Defendant was issued a cash check with KRW 475 million under the name of the victim immediately on the payment day.

However, at the time, the defendant or the above G company did not have the intention or ability to settle the above 500 million won per share on the settlement date due to financial difficulties.

Ultimately, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

2. On October 20, 2011, the Defendant: (a) at the coffee shop located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Cheongdam-dong, the Defendant was transferred from the victim H KRW 500,000,000 to the bank account in the name of the Defendant on the following grounds: (b) on October 20, 201, the Defendant stated that “on the part of an attorney-at-law who is well aware of the fact that the attorney-at-law who is taking charge of resolving the corporate obligation, would be at least 10% of the attorney-at-law’s fee, and would be at least 50,000,000 won as the contingent fee,” and that the Defendant was transferred from the victim to the bank account in the name of the Defendant.