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.

"2018 Highest 269"

1. On December 10, 2015, the Defendant against the victim C calls the victim C at an unspecified place and calls the victim C for the civil engineering work at the road construction site located in the Gannam-gun. The payment of the construction cost will be made until January 15, 2016.

The phrase “ makes a false statement.”

However, in fact, the Defendant was unable to perform the duty of tax such as value added tax imposed at the time, and the obligation of the construction site D at Yangsan City, which is another construction site, was accumulated, and even if it was paid from E, the contractor, the contractor for the construction site, it was thought that it was used for the purpose of repayment of the obligation at another construction site. Therefore, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to pay the construction cost as agreed upon by the victim.

As such, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim; (b) caused the victim to perform civil engineering works from December 18, 2015 to December 24, 2015; and (c) acquired pecuniary benefits equivalent to KRW 14,30,000,000,000 from December 18, 2015 to December 24, 2015.

2. On June 2016, the Defendant against the Victim F was the victim F at the scene of a new construction project in the Yeongdeungpo-gu Busan Metropolitan City G construction site, Busan Metropolitan City. The Defendant borrowed the victim F to allow the use of the crane at the site of a new construction project in the main complex. The Crain price shall be calculated on a monthly basis, and the user fee for the six months shall be paid at the end of August and the end of July at the end of September.

The phrase “ makes a false statement.”

However, the defendant did not have the intention or ability to pay the amount of money in the manner agreed to by the victim because the obligation was accumulated as stated in the first clause at the time.

As such, the Defendant, from June 2016 to July 2016, by deceiving the victim, did not pay KRW 18,150,000 to the victim, and did not pay KRW 18,150,000 to the victim.

3. On June 26, 2016, the criminal defendant against the victim H calls to the victim H at an influence place.