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

1. On August 16, 2016, the Defendant of the crime of fraud against the victim C, at an office in the construction site of the main road construction site in Yangsan-si A, the executive director of the company in charge of the resolution of the merger of the company in charge of the purchase and sale of earth and sand, “The Defendant shall bring in the earth and sand and shall be changed to KRW 10,000 per dump.

A dump estimate of KRW 30,000 shall be submitted to the head office to lend KRW 300,000,000 to the head office when the money has been lowered," and "The approval has been obtained from the president, and it is possible to bring in the earth and sand immediately if the approval has been obtained.

The phrase “(300,000 won) was changed.”

However, the defendant did not have the intent or ability to allow the victim to bring into Korea, even if he did not receive money from the injured party without the consent of the viewing supervisor at the above construction site.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 3 million in cash from the victim on or around the 17th day of the same month from the victim, and received KRW 3 million in cash from the Agricultural Cooperative Account (G) in the name of the Defendant on or around the 19th day of the same month, and obtained a total of KRW 6 million from the victim on two occasions, such as receiving KRW 3 million in cash from the victim.

2. On August 29, 2016, the Defendant committed the fraud against the victim H, knowing that at the site office of the main road construction site under construction in Yangsan-si D, the Defendant would try to conduct a land flat work for the purpose of stopping a building on the said land by either I and J land owners, the neighboring land in the construction site, and by the victim H, the victim’s attempt to do the land flat work for the purpose of blocking the building on the said land.

The term “the amount of KRW 500,000 shall be changed to the amount of KRW 5 million for internal work.”

However, even if the defendant received money from the injured party for the purpose of the construction work, he did not have the intent or ability to remove soil and sand and to carry out land flat work even though he did not think that he would consume money for the purpose of the living cost.

The defendant.