beta
Text
Defendant
A Imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months, and for a defendant B, for two years, respectively.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
Defendant
A and Defendant B have a long period of time, and E have been a subordinate employee of Defendant B for a long time.
1. Defendant A and Defendant B, as the head of the Fund in charge of the sale of H building located in Busan, Busan, on November 2005, was in charge of the sale of the H building in Busan, and Defendant B was in charge of the sale of the H building. At that time, Defendant A was in charge of the sale of the H building at the time of the electronic sign board manufacturing company, and Defendant B was in charge of the sale of the H because it was not easy at the time, and Defendant B was in charge of the sale of the electric sign board. While Defendant B did not have a large number of electric sign board members, it is suggested that Defendant B would be helpful for the sale of the advertising by using Defendant B’s electric sign board board with H in the form of belt to H. 3 to 4 floors. At that time, Defendant B entered into a contract for the sale of the 1,500,000 won electric sign board advertising with Defendant B 1,500,000 won, and Defendant A purchased the 1,500,000 won electric sign board advertising contract with Defendant 2.
Defendant
After the establishment of the electronic sign board, A received the payment of the remaining amount of 2.5 million won of the LED electronic sign board from the I, but it was not possible to request the LED K or the parent company K K to pay the balance without permission. Since the expected sale contract is not well-founded, it is not possible to give the LED electronic sign board tenant guidance advertising, it is not possible to pay the balance. Thus, Defendant A and Defendant B got pressure from each company to resolve the problem of the electronic sign board payment by attracting the victim who is known as having been the director of the LOJ to have been paid money.
Defendant
On November 2005, A and Defendant B conspired to discuss the installation of the electronic display board at H around November 2005, and give first guidance to the occupant company.