The phrase “ makes a false statement.”

However, in fact, from around 2010, the Defendant had been in bad credit standing due to delayed payment of the amount of KRW 30 million using credit cards, and the Defendant was paying the construction cost in the form of “refiscing the return of the construction cost” due to the absence of the construction cost, and even if receiving the payment from the injured party, there was no intention or ability to normally complete the interior construction work even if it was paid for the interior work from the injured party.

As above, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim; and (b) received from the victim, KRW 1.9 million around May 13, 2013; (c) KRW 2.3 million around May 14, 2013; (d) KRW 6.9 million around May 16, 2013; (e) KRW 5 million around May 28, 2013; and (e) KRW 2,11 million around May 30, 2013.

2. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the fact that the financial situation of the defendant was deteriorated as at May 2013, as stated in the facts charged, and that the defendant was at the same time under contract for construction works on several construction sites is recognized.

However, according to the above evidence, the defendant started its removal work on May 14, 2013 and 3 days after the date when the last payment of the construction cost was received.

6. Until March 3, 200, the fact that the Defendant was engaged in the operation of a wooden hole, electric lighting work, painting work, and air conditioner installation, etc. The damaged party was at the construction site every day and paid 21,100,000 won in five installments, excluding 1.9,000,000,000,000 won out of the agreed construction cost as stated in the facts charged, as stated in the facts charged, and the Defendant agreed to the entirety of the construction cost, but agreed to install a house at a intervals with the injured party during the construction process, and changed the agreement to install a house at a one-half of the total construction cost.