When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

On September 8, 2010, the Defendant stated that “the Defendant would make embling operations at the above issues owned by the Defendant at Sacheon-si Co., Ltd.,” to the victim D, who was engaged in embling operations in front of the arguments owned by the Defendant, “on the other hand, 80,000 won for the construction work shall be paid in lump sum on October 20 of the same year when the construction work is completed.”

However, the defendant did not have the ability to pay the price even if the victim embling work in the above argument because of a large amount of debt at the time.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, had the victim do embling work equivalent to approximately KRW 8.8 million in the above argument, and did not pay the price, thereby acquiring pecuniary benefits equivalent to the same amount.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness D;

1. A complaint;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to standard contracts for civil engineering works;

1. Relevant Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;