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

The Defendant is the head of the site office of the Gyeongjin-gun E New Housing Construction Corporation, and the victim F is the representative of the “G” who has been subcontracted the interior interior interior part of the said construction work, and is subject to supervision and approval on the performance of the relevant construction work from the Defendant.

Around April 30, 2011, the Defendant, at the construction site at the above site, stated, “If she wishes to be able to carry out construction works, 50,000 won shall be paid in cash to the head of the site, who is the director of the site. It is prohibited from doing construction works without giving money, and may terminate the construction contract and make it impossible to receive the payment for completed portion.”

On May 26, 201, the Defendant issued 20 million won to the victim’s employees H at the above construction site via the victim’s employees at the above construction site. On June 16, 2011, the Defendant directly received KRW 10 million from the victim in cash and check from the victim’s on-board ship of the dead side of the Ganjin-gun, Ulsan-gun.

Accordingly, the defendant was given a total of KRW 30 million by threatening the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the police statement of victim F;

1. Relevant Article 350 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 350 (1) of the Election of Imprisonment;

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter referred to as "the grounds for sentencing"), which are favorable to the defendant;

1. Where the mitigation area ( April-1 year and February) in the mitigation area ( April-1 year and February) of Grade II (the scope of recommending punishment) (the amount of not less than 30 million won, and the amount of less than 100 million won) has been reduced due to the sentencing guidelines and significant damage have been restored;

2. Although the nature of the crime in this case’s sentencing decision is not less than that of the crime in question in light of the method, content, the amount of the crime in this case’s sentencing, the defendant’s mistake and reflects his mistake, the repayment of the amount of damage and agreed with the victim, there is no record of punishment heavier than that of the fine, and all other conditions of sentencing, including the defendant’s age, character and conduct, family environment, etc.