If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Around July 7, 2008, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant would pay the price to the victim B as the completion of the project is made at the construction site at the site at the Gansansansan city where the project is completed.”

However, the defendant did not have property and had no intent or ability to pay the construction cost until the agreed date even if the victim completes the construction work.

By July 8, 2008, the Defendant had the victim complete the joint construction work equivalent to KRW 1,700,000 for the construction cost, and had the victim complete the joint construction work from that time to July 14, 2008 in the same manner, as shown in the separate crime list, and had the victim perform the construction work equivalent to KRW 5,295,000 for a total of five times from that time.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement concerning B;

1. Application of the written estimate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. In light of the fact that the reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act Article 334(1) of the provisional payment order is an agreement which is not the reason for sentencing, and the efforts to recover damage is not present, the liability for the crime is not easy. However, considering all the circumstances, such as the fact that the crime was committed with willful misconduct, there is no punishment for the same kind of crime, no criminal record for the suspended execution or more, and there is no criminal record for the suspended execution or more, it is against the victim, and the repayment