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

The defendant is the representative director of C (State) who is a construction company.

On November 2012, the Defendant said that the Defendant would pay the construction cost within one month after the completion of the construction work at the Incheon apartment construction site subcontracted from the construction site of the building site of the building site of the building site of the building site of the building site of the building site of the building site of the building site of the building site of the building site of the building site of the building site of the building site of the building site of the building site of the building site of the building site of the building site of the Incheon.

However, at the time of fact, C(State)’s obligation was spent in approximately KRW 3 billion on the interest of each month and KRW 17 million on the interest of each month, and the past C(State) failed to pay the construction cost to other companies that provided the subcontract when making payment, and even if the victim completes the installation work of new apartment construction site, there was no intention or ability to pay the construction cost at the time.

As above, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim; and (b) from the early December 2012 to February 15, 2013, the Defendant acquired pecuniary benefits equivalent to the same amount due to the Defendant’s failure to pay KRW 58,300,000 for the construction cost on the new apartment construction site in Echeon and Incheon; and (c) failure to pay KRW 58,300,000 for the construction cost.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The prosecutor's protocol of interrogation of the accused (including the record in E statement);

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. A complaint filed by E;

1. A copy of tax invoice;

1. Although the Defendant alleged that he had no intention to acquire by deception at the time of the instant crime, the following circumstances, which are acknowledged by the aforementioned evidence, namely, the Defendant was in excess of his liability at the time of the instant crime, and the Defendant did not pay the construction cost received from GS Construction and Treatment Construction, which is the original company, to the victim, would not have any other way to pay the construction cost.