The defendant dismissed the application for compensation filed by the applicant for compensation.

The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. On June 22, 2012, the Defendant: (a) was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Illegal Check Control Act at the Daejeon District Court on August 2, 2012; and (b) on June 30, 2012, the said judgment became final and conclusive.

On March 201, the Defendant, as representative director of D Co., Ltd., and around March 201, knew that he holds a check number F, face value 50 million won per share issued to E, and had the victim C with intent to borrow money on the pretext that it is necessary to prevent the check book from being able to prevent the check book.

On April 29, 2011, the Defendant made a false statement that “D is very difficult at present, D is a stoplight, and D is a party’s number of shares with a width at the time of default, and at the time of lending KRW 20 million, the check book will be closed and the loan will be repaid.”

However, at the time, the defendant was already unable to pay a bill of exchange on December 2010, and he was subject to disposition on two occasions due to the failure to pay the bill of exchange, and even if he borrowed money from the victim as above due to serious financial difficulties such as D also in crisis, he did not have the intent or ability to pay the borrowed money by normalizing the company.

The Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 20 million from the victim to the Agricultural Cooperative Account in the name of D Co., Ltd. under the name of D Co., Ltd. as the borrowed money.

2. The gist of the defendant's and defense counsel's assertion was remitted to KRW 20 million by the corporate passbook of the D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "D"). However, although the defendant asked E to discount a face value of KRW 50 million per unit (hereinafter "the check of this case"), the defendant was aware that he was paid at a face value of KRW 20 million, and the defendant was aware that he was paid at a face value of the check, and there was no fact that he was deceiving the victim.

3. Determination A.