When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

From July 2013 to June 2014, the Defendant: (a) received a contract from GK General Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Public Party Company”) located in Seongdong-gu, Sungwon-si, Sungwon-si to pay personnel expenses while performing the construction works for the steel bars; (b) the Defendant’s steel-line equipment was decided to sell the Defendant’s steel-line equipment to the Nonparty Company C; and (c) the Defendant received KRW 5 million from the company other than the public prosecution, and KRW 3 million from the D construction that entered into a contract for the construction project with the company other than the public prosecution, and received KRW 5 million from the company other than the public prosecution via E.

While it is necessary for the Defendant to continue to carry on the steel-frame assembly construction business, the Defendant filed a complaint with C and received a return of the said steel-frame equipment as the economic state gets worse by deeming losses at another construction site.

On November 13, 2014, the Defendant, at the civil petition office of the police station in the Changwon-gu, Sungwon-si, Sungwon-si, Sungwon-si, 177 (hereinafter “instant equipment”), arbitrarily cut off steel bars with the equipment of KRW 1,5120,00 (hereinafter “instant equipment”).

“” submitted a false complaint and rejected C.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness F, C and G;

1. Determination as to the Defendant and his/her defense counsel’s assertion of the accusation charge, electronic tax invoice, each recording form, and each investigation report (E victim remittance confirmation investigation)

1. The gist of the claim is that the Defendant only sold the bareboat and cutting machine among the instant equipment to C in excess of 6 million won, but did not include the remaining equipment in the contract, and included the bareboat and cutting machine in the accusation room is due to the number of administrative agents.

2. The following circumstances and the defendant's attitude shown in the investigation process, which can be acknowledged by taking into account the evidence of the judgment.