No. 1-A of the judgment of the defendant

(b) a crime and

As to the crime, the second through nine crimes of the holding are committed in two months of imprisonment.

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal Power] On October 16, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspension of the execution of six months of imprisonment for fraud at the Suwon District Court on June 16, 2009, and the judgment became final and conclusive on December 11 of the same year.

[2013 Highest 2489]

1. Fraud against victim D;

A. On June 2009, the Defendant: (a) at the office of G near the Gangnam-gu Seoul Francing G, Seoul, the Defendant: (b) provided the victim D with approximately KRW 1.1 billion if he/she offered 3,633 square meters and four parcels of land owned by the H as collateral to the Gyeonggi-do Lan forestry cooperative located in Pyeongtaek-gun; (c) in order to obtain a loan for the money, the amount of appraisal should be increased; (d) the case cost of KRW 40 million was required to be paid to the appraiser for this purpose.

However, in fact, there was no intention or ability to get a bank loan to get a high appraisal of real estate or to get a bank loan as a security.

As such, on June 25, 2000 won from the victim by deceiving the victim and deceiving the victim, at one bank account (Account Number Non) in the name of the defendant on June 25, 2009, and the same year.

7. 1. The Defendant acquired the money in total of KRW 7 million, including KRW 2 million, by means of the Agricultural Cooperative Account (Account Number Non) in the name of the Defendant.

B. On August 2009, the Defendant: (a) conducted an appraisal and assessment on the land outside 2139 square meters, and six parcels before Daejeon Dong-gu I, Daejeon; (b) made a false statement to the victim that “Around 2139 square meters and six parcels of real property owned by J may be offered as collateral to the NA-dong branch of the Daejeon-dong, Daejeon-gu I, Daejeon-gu, and borrowed approximately KRW 2.5 billion to the Defendant. To obtain the loan, the amount of appraisal and assessment on the said real property should be increased; and (c) so, the amount of appraisal and assessment to be paid to the appraiser is required.”

However, in fact, there was no intention or ability to get a bank loan to get a high appraisal of real estate or to get a bank loan as a security.

As such, the Defendant is the victim.