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

On May 19, 2010, the Defendant: (a) was working as the head of the headquarters at the construction site of the Suwon-si Suwon-si Construction Site of Gyeonggi-do; (b) stated, “The Victim F introduced through D and E at the container office at the construction site of the above construction site shall be paid KRW 10 million to E in return for having the construction start and operate the brin restaurant at the construction site from the construction site to the completion of construction; and (c) paid KRW 20 million to B.

However, as the construction at the time was selected as a contractor, there was no fact that the defendant entered into a contract or delegated the authority to enter into a contract with respect to the treatment Construction and the right to operate the restaurant, and there was no dispute over the construction cost between the city and the treatment Construction, and even if the victim received money from the victim, the victim did not have the intention or ability to grant the right to operate the restaurant.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received KRW 20 million from the victim, namely, from the victim’s seat to the D account, and by allowing the above E to provide KRW 10 million, thereby defrauding the victim with KRW 30 million.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Partial statement of each police interrogation protocol of the defendant and Eul (including the part in which each statement in F and G is written);

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. A complaint;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the contract, receipt, loan certificate, and statement of passbook transaction;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 347 (1) and (2) of the Criminal Act (the point of fraud and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Determination of the defendant and defense counsel's assertion under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of the community service order

1. The summary of the assertion is the intent and ability to allow the victim to operate the brine restaurant with the head of H, who is the executor of the construction site of the Suwon-si C Apartment Construction Site (hereinafter “instant site”).