2. The sentencing data that are favorable to the Defendant are the following: (a) the Defendant took the attitude of recognizing and opposing the Defendant’s mistake; (b) the Defendant and the victim M have reached an agreement between the Defendant and the victim M and M did not want to punish the Defendant; and (c) some of the victims’ damages have been paid in the first instance.

However, among the crimes in this case, the nature of the crime in violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Fraud) against the victim corporation B is not good as follows, and the damage suffered by the victim is not small.

- The Defendant made a false statement to the effect that G Construction Corporation was a government-funded construction work and the construction cost was deposited in KRW 50 billion in the absence of the intent or ability to pay the price even if the Defendant was supplied with earth and sand transport services from the victim B, and made him/her carry out a transport contract with F Co., Ltd. Furthermore, in order to avoid the payment of the transport price to F Co., Ltd. despite the fact that he/she entered into a transport contract with F Co., Ltd., the Defendant concluded a transport contract with the victim Co., Ltd., the Defendant would have his/her spouse and sent the text message to E, and the representative Z of T Co., Ltd. issued a false tax invoice under the name of T Co., Ltd. and presented it to E.

- The Defendant entered into a transport contract with FF Co., Ltd., and paid KRW 63,874,00 in return, but only KRW 24.2 million out of them was paid on the part of F Co., Ltd. on October 17, 2015 as the transport price in December 17, 2015.

- The Defendant entered into a contract to supply embankings carried out at the above construction site to S Co., Ltd., and the victim B. who transported embankings to S Co., Ltd.