When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

The Defendant is a person who runs a salt processing business with the trade name “C” in Seogugu-gu.

On September 7, 2016, the Defendant called “E” to the victim F, who operates an original supply company through D, a C director, “A will pay the price to C by October 2016, if the Defendant supplied the original team to C.”

However, at the time of fact, the Defendant had no intention or ability to pay the amount in time, even if the Defendant had to pay the amount in KRW 100 million to KRW 140 million per month, while the Defendant had to pay the amount in KRW 10 million to KRW 3 million per month and received the original amount from the victim

As above, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim; and (b) obtained pecuniary benefits equivalent to the amount of KRW 7,215,380 on the same day from the victim; (c) on the 19th day of the 19th day of the same month from the victim; (d) was supplied with polypathical goods equivalent to KRW 11,215,380 in total; and (e) paid KRW 4,000,000 in total; and (e) did not pay KRW 7,215,380 in total; and (e) acquired pecuniary benefits equivalent to the same amount.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each police statement made to F and D;

1. Data posted on the national newspaper: Written request for each error, copies of electronic tax invoices, details of entry and departure transactions;

1. According to the investigation report (a copy of the debt certificate and the original order), investigation report (a copy of the application for bankruptcy and exemption), investigation report (to hear the witness D's statement about the payment of the original order), investigation report (to hear the statement about the due date for the payment of the original order), investigation report (the defendant's statement about the due date for the other party payment), investigation report (the suspect's additional obligation confirmation), and investigation report (the confirmation of the suspect's additional obligation amount), even if the defendant fails to receive the payment from other companies, he/she is considered to be unable to pay the victim with the money, and it is recognized that he/she was supplied with the goods from the victim without notifying the victim of the fact. Thus, the defendant is deemed to have had an intention to commit fraud.