beta
Text
Defendant
A Imprisonment with prison labor of one year and six months, and each of the defendants B and C shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor of eight months.
except that from the date of this judgment.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
Defendant
A is the head of the R site conducted by the victim Q Q Co., Ltd (hereinafter referred to as the "victim Co., Ltd.") and has been in charge of the above construction site. Defendant B is the representative director of the PU (hereinafter referred to as the "UU") who mainly takes charge of the management of the construction site, including the selection of a subcontractor as the head of the victim Co., Ltd. from around 2010 to December 2013. Defendant C is the head of the Civil Works Headquarters of the victim Co., Ltd., who takes charge of the management of the construction site of the construction site. Defendant C is the representative director of the PU (hereinafter referred to as the "UUU") who mainly takes charge of the management of the sales, cost management, receipts, and the selection of subcontractors, etc. of the victim Co., Ltd. as the head of the Civil Works Division of the victim Co., Ltd. for the civil engineering sector.
The Defendants selected a subcontractor as the head of the scene of the victim company, the head of the civil engineering work team, and the head of the civil engineering headquarters, and there were occupational duties to prevent damages to the victim company by examining whether the estimate presented by the subcontractor is reasonable in concluding the contract with the selected company.
Nevertheless, Defendant A made a subcontract to U.S. for the construction of R’s tunnel integrated management and video oil storage system between S around the summer 2012. However, Defendant A entered into an agreement with S to receive a refund of the difference between the unrefilled construction cost and the actual construction cost after making up the unftened construction cost from the victim company by withdrawing the construction contract amount. Defendant B around that time reported to the purport that “A would have received a refund of the said amount of the construction contract in lieu of giving a subcontract to U.S. company, by withdrawing the amount of the construction contract from August 2012 to October 2012, Defendant C would also receive a refund of the said amount of the construction contract amount to KRW 100 million.”