A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant, who became aware of the problem of the establishment of the kimchi factory in Yongcheon, stated that the victim C was aware of the problem of the establishment of the kimchi factory, and in particular, he expressed that the victim C was aware of the peace police or the prosecution and that he was aware of the intention of prosecutor's office D and I.

1. On March 2012, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim’s vehicle in front of the Dondong Station located in Busan Dongdong-gu, Busan (hereinafter referred to as the “Dondong-gu”), stating that the victim’s son was subject to an investigation by the Franchi Police Station in Busan as a result of theft of the victim’s son from the victim’s son’s son (hereinafter referred to as the “F Dondong-gu”), and that the victim “I will not see the victim’s son’s son, but to solve the problem by ascertaining about the son’s son’s problem.”

However, in fact, the defendant did not have any person who is aware of the police or the prosecutor's office, and did not have any relationship with the prosecutor's office D, so even if he received one million won from the victim, he did not have the intent or ability to resolve the criminal case problem of the victim by soliciting the police or the prosecutor's office to the above money.

Nevertheless, the defendant deceivings the victim as above and received one million won in cash from the injured party around that time.

Accordingly, the defendant received money and valuables under the pretext of deceiving the victim, deceiving the property, and soliciting the affairs handled by the public officials.

2. On March 2012, the Defendant made a false statement in front of the Busan Geum-gu Police Station located in 1819, as the center of the Geum-gu, Busan, the Defendant: (a) the victim’s children were investigated into the said criminal case in the aforesaid police station; and (b) the victim told that “the head of the police division, who knows, would have deducted the children from the point of view.”

However, even if the defendant receives money from the injured party under the pretext of the value of occupation, the defendant is willing to resolve the criminal case problem of the injured party's children by soliciting the chief of the police with the money.