A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than ten months.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. On February 18, 2011, the Defendant of the 2016 Highest 989, the Defendant would have the victim receive orders from the company, such as Hanyang, etc., from the victim at the office of the victim D (L) E (E) of the victim located in the Soh-si on February 18, 201.

In order to hold several shares, it was called that n't have to pay the street expenses and there is a difference in operating expenses.

However, the defendant thought that he received money from the injured party for personal purposes, such as money, and even if he received operating expenses from the injured party, he did not intend to operate his business so that the injured party can receive the order of construction.

The Defendant received 200,000 won from the injured party to the Gwangju Bank account under the name of the Defendant as business expenses for the same day, and received a total of 58,30,000 won from the time to December 19, 2013, as shown in the list of crimes in attached Form 18 times, from the time to December 19, 2013.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

2. On February 18, 2011, the Defendant of the 2017 Highest 1125, the Defendant would allow D to receive orders, such as gas pipes, from a company, such as Hanyang, etc., from a company, at the office of the D Operation (L) E (UE) located in such a city.

In order to hold several shares, it was called that n't have to pay the street expenses and there is a difference in operating expenses.

However, the defendant thought that he received money from D and used money for personal purposes, such as money for business expenses, and even if he received business expenses from D, he did not have any intention or ability to receive business expenses so that he can receive orders from D.

On October 2012, the Defendant continued to ask D to the effect that “I gas pipes, etc. will be allowed to receive orders, such as gas pipes construction,” and that “D would be allowed to receive orders from gas pipes, etc.,” and that this horses would be allowed to the victim G, a operator of F Co., Ltd., a corporation F, in which D was known to him/her, to be entitled to receive orders from the A gas pipes construction.”

In this respect.