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

"2015 Highest 158"

1. The criminal defendant against the victim C, the victim D, the victim E, and the victim F did not have the intent or ability to pay the cost even if he/she received the payment of the construction cost from H while he/she contracted the H’s housing repair work from H at three times, and received the payment of the construction cost from H. Thus, the victim C, the victim D, the victim E, and the victim F did not have any specific property.

Around March 25, 2009, the Defendant against the victim C made a false statement to the effect that “I repair a house of H located in G at the time of inland fishing,” from the store of building materials operated by the victim C at Gangwon-do, the Defendant supplied the victim with construction materials equivalent to KRW 8 million, including cement, from April 7, 2009 to April 27, 2009, and acquired a pecuniary benefit equivalent to that amount by failing to pay KRW 1.9 million out of the price.

B. On April 7, 2009, the Defendant against the victim D, at H’s house, ordered the victim D to pay KRW 7,500,000,000 for the construction cost, if he/she had the project to execute the rooftop waterproof and painting. Of the construction cost, the Defendant would first pay KRW 4,00,000,000,00,000,000,000,000,000 from April 7, 2009 to June 2009, and had the victim perform the above construction work, and did not pay KRW 7,50,000,000,00,000 for the construction cost to the victim.

C. On April 2009, the Defendant against the victim E paid KRW 2,200,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 won, to the victim E, in the case of a cross-disscam of the trade name, which is located in the first Triman.