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

The defendant is a person who operates a pesticide company in the name of "C pesticide company" in Macheon-si B, and from around 2009, he sold Henice film from the victim corporation D with the delivery of Henice film. On March 2013, the defendant renewed the contract with the victim company and set up a collateral security right with the maximum claim amount of 85 million won on three lots of land, such as net E, F, etc., owned by the defendant, as a security for the payment of goods.

1. On May 2016, the Defendant related to the fraud of the right to collateral security should cancel the right to collateral security that was created as a security for the renewal of the loan from the person G in charge of G, who is an employee of the victim of the foregoing pesticide C after the early adoption of May 2016, with the maximum amount of the loan KRW 30 million after the renewal of the loan from the bank, or offer the amount of KRW 20 million as security of the deposit amount of the three pesticide offices after the renewal of the loan from the bank, and the outstanding amount of KRW 18,850,906 until now shall be repaid by September 2016.

“......”

However, even if the injured party cancelled the right to collateral security established on the land owned by the above E, the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to re-establish the right to collateral security on the land owned by the above E, which provided the right to collateral security as additional security for the place of business

The Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim as above; (b) caused the victim to cancel the right to collateral security established on the land owned by the above E on May 20, 2016; (c) thereby obtaining pecuniary benefits equivalent to KRW 85 million, the maximum amount of the claim; and (d) inflict pecuniary damage equivalent to the same amount on the victim.

After all, the Defendant acquired financial benefits by deceiving the victim.

2. On May 2016, the Defendant: (a) sent the money to the Defendant for the purchase of goods to the Defendant on the ground that “The Defendant would sell and send the money for the sale of the goods requested by the Defendant to the Defendant on the ground that the Defendant would sell the goods at

different. The phrase “....”

(b).