The Defendant, as an actual operator of C Co., Ltd., an environmental facility company, was sentenced to two years of suspension of execution on November 18, 2016, due to a violation of the Labor Standards Act in the Busan District Court’s Branch Branch Branch Branch on November 10, 2016, and the judgment was finalized on November 18, 2016. The victim D is the actual operator of E Co., Ltd., an environmental facility manufacturing company.

On July 2015, the Defendant would promptly pay the amount of goods to the victim if he had loaded necessary PVC materials at the G construction site located in Mexico F.

“Along on September 5, 2015, it was supplied by the injured party with a total amount of KRW 110 million in the market value, such as piping materials and pipes reconcilating around September 5, 2015.

However, in fact, from April 2015 to August 201, the Defendant: (a) invested KRW 200 million in Mexico; (b) went out of the financial difficulties; (c) discontinued most of the businesses run in the Republic of Korea, such as the Ulsan Hyundai Automobile Factory; and (d) immediately before the closure of business, such as the amount in arrears with personnel expenses to KRW 200 million, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to pay the said amount even if he received such materials from the injured party.

Accordingly, the defendant deceivings the victim as above and acquired the amount equivalent to KRW 110 million at the market price.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police in each protocol concerning D;

1. Each description of a copy of a written estimate, each written statement of waiver of construction, and each written statement of performance;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Statement of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, each statement of investigation report (verification of the results of separate investigation), and the application of statutes to this court and the results of search of sentences;

1. Relevant Article 347 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. Grounds for sentencing under the first sentence of Article 39(1)(1) of the Criminal Act for the treatment of concurrent crimes (the sentencing criteria shall not apply since there are concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act)

The amount of fraud of this case is considerably large and the damage is also recovered.