A Imprisonment with prison labor for two years, and for one year, for Defendant B.

, however, the defendant from the date of this judgment.

Defendant

A from September 201 to May 201, a person operating H in substance, and Defendant B, from May 201 to May 201, as a person operating the State I in substance, the above two companies jointly run the business of selling officetels, the management and execution of the company's funds, and Defendant B is in charge of management supervision at the officetel construction site.

From December 2011, the Defendants: (a) purchased an officetel that is not easily sold after the completion of the building; or (b) released an auction for an officetel that is in the process of auction; and (c) had the internal interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior or partition construction; and (d) had been engaged in the business of paying profits from the sale of officetels at a higher price; (b) had the victim E, a construction business operator, via K, a construction business operator, who is the head of the office of the J-U.S.-Gu building site in Bupyeong-gu, Seoul, by failing to pay the construction cost of the officetel directly operated by the office that has been due to its financial difficulties; and (c) had the victim E, a construction business operator, who was the construction business operator, who was the owner of the office of the office building in charge of the office building in charge

On January 3, 2012, the Defendants conspired to make K, the head of the site at the construction site of the above J building, the Defendant, “F, in advance, would cause the victim to pay KRW 10,00,000 in cash,” which means that “The construction cost shall be paid in cash as the completion of the construction work,” and that the victim would be paid in cash from January 4, 2012 to February 20, 2012, the amount of the construction cost of KRW 16,046,310 in the amount of KRW 6,7 of J building and the amount of KRW 16,000 in the amount of KRW 7 of the construction cost.

However, the construction cost is paid in cash even if the victim completed the construction work as above, even if the construction cost was paid in KRW 46,000,000 by the direct management of the J-building related to the building around February 2, 2012, since the sale or lease of the officetel conducted by the Defendants was not properly performed.