If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

1. Around June 26, 2013, the Defendant entered into a false statement that “A victim C subcontracted the construction work from a new housing construction company located in Gyeonggi-si B, Gyeonggi-do, to the victim C” at the site of a new housing construction company located in Gyeonggi-gu, Gyeonggi-do. The Defendant would pay KRW 7890,000 for the construction cost within three days as the construction work ends.”

However, the defendant did not have been awarded a subcontract from the pension company, and the victim did not have the intent or ability to pay the construction cost within three days even after the completion of the construction.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, had the victim complete the heating construction work, and did not pay the amount equivalent to KRW 7890,000 for the construction cost, thereby acquiring the same pecuniary benefit.

2. On March 28, 2014, the Defendant entered into a false statement that the victim D would pay the construction cost immediately after the completion of the civil construction work on the ground that the victim D was awarded a subcontract for the civil construction work at the new housing construction site located in Gyeonggi-si E, Gyeonggi-si, and that the victim D would be the vice president of Dong-nam DNS, and that it would be awarded a subcontract for the new housing construction work.

However, the fact was that the defendant only lent the name of the (ju) DoNS, and there was no intention or ability to pay the construction cost even after the victim completes the construction.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, had the victim do work by lending sckes from April 16, 2014 to the victim, and stated that the charges of KRW 1,1150,00 for construction cost are “1,50,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 won.” However, it is obvious that the record is an

It did not pay a considerable amount of money and acquired property profits equivalent to the same amount of money.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each police interrogation protocol against the accused;

1. Each police officer against D and C.