However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On May 14, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment for four months at the Incheon District Court for fraud, and the judgment became final and conclusive on September 26, 2015.

The defendant is the vice president of the LABC and D is the representative director of the LABC.

On May 2015, the Defendant and D received a request from the victim F to accept at a discount of KRW 35 million in cash a copy of an electronic bill, which caused the amount of KRW 40 million issued by the ordinary company in charge of the settlement of disputes, through E, which is an executive officer of the company in charge of its transaction, at the Seocho-dong, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul.

On May 2015, the Defendant and D used the electronic bill at a discount of 35 million won in cash from G, the representative of his other transaction companies, and returned only the remaining 25 million won for the victim, while the Defendant and D had kept the electronic bill for the victim at a discount of 35 million won in cash.

Accordingly, the defendant and D embezzled the victim's property in collusion.

[Defendant-Appellant] was aware of the above Promissory Notes as D’s Promissory Notes, and was unaware of the fact that the Promissory Notes was received for discount

However, with respect to the construction of a housing complex to the head of the Dong-si population H (hereinafter referred to as the “instant construction”), D required funds to receive the said construction

I had been proposed from the side to subcontract part of the above construction to C at a discount of the sum of KRW 200 million at face value, and had delivered this content to the Defendant (D’s legal statement). The Defendant’s India had known that the discount amount of the above bill ought to enter the Defendant’s “cost for new model voucher construction” for the instant construction (in the investigation record, 187 pages). The fact that the above bill was known to the effect that it was entrusted to D and the Defendant for the purpose of raising the “cost for new model voucher construction” in relation to the instant construction.

In light of the statement (the investigation record 188 pages), the defendant shall be entrusted to D and the defendant for the discount of the bill.