On September 1, 2010, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a crime of violating the Act on the Protection of Defense at the Daegu District Court on September 1, 201, and on October 28, 2011, the Defendant was released on October 30, 201 during the execution of the sentence from the Daegu Prison on parole on October 30, 201.

On August 2013, the Defendant: (a) had the right to implement the racing and urban planning facility B (C district); (b) had been entrusted by the D corporation operating the Defendant from the land division rearrangement cooperative in chain B; (c) had sold the land scheduled to receive from the D corporation first after the normal completion of the project, and had the Defendant thought that D corporation would be used to pay the urgent debt.

On May 16, 2014, the Defendant was awarded a contract for the racing urban planning B (C district) project to the victim E from the land subdivision rearrangement association located in the Hamk-si F on May 16, 2014.

From November 201, 2014, the sale price for the sale of housing sites is KRW 2,00,000 per square meter, but the preferential purchase price is KRW 1,00,000 per square meter, which is 50% of the sale price, may be the test to sell the site at 200 square meters per square meter.

The hotel site and the land of the reservoir were sold all.

“False speech was made to the effect that it was “.”

However, in fact, the Defendant and D Co., Ltd did not have any way to procure the basic costs for farmland diversion charges, which are the preceding conditions of the progress of the above B facility project, and for surveying, replotting design, and excavation of cultural properties, which must be prior to the progress of the civil engineering project, and there was no scheduled plan for the said project to proceed with civil engineering works under a contract with a certain contractor. Therefore, there was no way to consult with the union on the pre-sale of land to be paid by the land subdivision rearrangement cooperative, which is the project undertaker after completion of the construction. There was no fact that there was no consultation with the union on the pre-sale of land to be paid to the execution agent. Money received from the injured party was used for the repayment of personal debts and the liquidation of wages in arrears. On November 2014