A shall be punished by imprisonment for eight months.

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

Defendant

A, as the representative director of G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “G”) in the Daegu Suwon-gu, on August 17, 2012, was sentenced to imprisonment for ten months in the Daegu District Court for fraud, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on December 12, 2012.

Defendant

On November 30, 2006, A entered into a contract with the president of the H Redevelopment Project Association with the content of accepting the right to implement the redevelopment project in the amount of 4 billion won from I.

However, at the time, Defendant A did not have a method of preparing KRW 1.0 billion necessary for the down payment and intermediate payment to be paid to the partnership before the removal work, and as it was difficult to prepare the necessary KRW 200 million due to the provisional contract deposit, Defendant A granted the right to remove the goods to J and K, etc. on January 2007, and received KRW 50 million from the J and K around January 2007. At the time of authorization for establishment, authorization for project implementation, and authorization for management and disposal was not required.

Nevertheless, according to the records of the victim N through L (main name M) which is the vice president at the G office around January 2007, Defendant A and P are recognized as having agreed with the victim N and having been entrusted with the right to operate the cafeteria and the right to remove the cafeteria, but Defendant A and L were only recognized as having entered into a contract with the victim N and the right to remove the cafeteria without knowing it. Thus, it is difficult to seeO and P as the victim in relation to Defendant A.

I explained to the effect that “the project implementation authorization, management and disposal authorization, and the removal shall begin immediately after the completion of the project implementation authorization.”

However, at the time of January 2007, redevelopment project was not completed the above authorization procedure required for its implementation, and there was no way to prepare down payment and intermediate payment of KRW 1 billion with the financial resources of Defendant A, so the acquisition of the enforcement right itself was not clear, as well as the receipt of KRW 50 million under the pretext of granting the right of removal from J, K, etc., so it is not easy to reduce it again to the victim.

Nevertheless, it is not appropriate.