사기
Defendants are not guilty. The summary of the judgment against Defendant A is publicly announced.
1. Defendant A of the facts charged in the instant case is a person who established the Victim F with E, and the victim is a company subcontracted G dredging work from the interest industry, and Defendant B is a person who subcontracted the dredging work of H, which is necessary for the said dredging work from the victim.
Although Defendant B had already received full amount of the cost for dismantling and repairing work of the above H, Defendant B conspired to claim for the said work cost again to the victim. On August 30, 2010, Defendant B claimed KRW 40 million from the victim’s office located in Busan Dong-gu, Busan to the J as the cost for dismantling and repairing work of H. At that time, Defendant B received KRW 40 million from J around that time, and then paid KRW 35 million among them to Defendant A.
As a result, the Defendants conspired to attract the victim to receive 40 million won from the victim.
2. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, including the witness K and J’s respective legal statements, Defendant B, at the victim’s office around August 30, 2010, knew that there was a defendant A, E, and the vice president of the F, at the time when the victim’s office requested the defendant A and E to pay KRW 40 million, and Defendant B, at that location, provided that “the money would have to be given to E, and there was an urgent circumstance.” The accounting staff J transferred KRW 40 million to the defendant B at that time according to the direction of E and the defendant A, and E and K had already been aware that there was an agreement to pay KRW 40 million to the defendant in direct repair of the victim’s office at the victim’s office at the victim’s office at the victim’s office at the victim’s office, and that there was an agreement to dismiss the above victim’s joint repair staff at the victim’s office at the time of the above recognition.