Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On March 15, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year and two months of imprisonment for fraud, etc. at the Seoul Central District Court on March 23, 2012, and operated a construction company called “C”, which became final and conclusive on March 23, 2012.

On February 24, 2009, the Defendant falsely stated that “The Defendant would pay meals to the complainants every 15 days on the high-pollution level in the F cafeteria located in the Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Gangnam-gu, Seoul.”

However, even if the victim provides meals to the people, the defendant did not have the intent or ability to pay food costs.

As such, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim; (b) from February 25, 2009 to April 30, 2009, the victim provided the victim with the Defendant’s construction site staff members of the building site with an abundance of KRW 2,558,00,00; (c) but (d) did not pay the price, thereby acquiring pecuniary benefits equivalent to the said amount.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of the witness H;

1. Statement made by witnesses D in the third protocol of the trial;

1. Each police statement made to D and H;

1. A complaint filed in D;

1. A copy of book and a notice of repayment of meal costs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (a copy of opinions);

1. Relevant Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order, the Defendant asserts that the instant meal costs are not the Defendant, but the Defendant, not the Defendant, to be paid by H, and that the meal costs are different from the facts charged. However, apart from whether the Defendant and H are ultimately liable for meal costs, the Defendant provided meals of KRW 2,558,00,00 from D by stating that he/she would provide meals to the persons who are responsible for him/her.