beta
Text
Defendant
A Imprisonment for eight months, and Defendant B for four months, respectively.
However, this judgment is delivered against Defendant B.
Reasons
【Judgment on the Facts of prosecution】 The judgment on the whole facts charged shall be conducted in entirety for the convenience of judgment, and the judgment shall be adopted by dividing the guilty part and the non-guilty part.
1. On May 28, 2013, Defendant A was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a period of ten months in the Hongsung branch of the Daejeon District Court. The above judgment was finalized on November 28, 2013, and Defendant B was sentenced to one year of imprisonment with prison labor for fraud, etc. in the Daejeon District Court Red Branch on May 28, 2013, and the above judgment was finalized on September 17, 2013.
[2013 Highest 3943]
1. Defendant B’s co-principal construction owner of “G”, which is a multi-family housing with four consent, on the parcel of land, F of the Chungcheongnam-gun, Hongsung-gun, and three, and Defendant A was a contractor who constructed a building by being awarded a contract for the construction of the above loan around March 22, 2011. Defendant A subcontracted the construction of the machinery and equipment of the above loan with remuneration of KRW 140 million to the victim E on March 31, 201 at the site office of the construction site of the above loan. Defendant B consented to this. Defendant B agreed to the purport that “The remuneration shall be paid as completed by the construction, and it shall be paid as the substitute of the above 1,301 loan in lieu of cash.”
However, in fact, Defendant B had a debt equivalent to KRW 600,000,000 which was borrowed and repaid as the purchase price of the above loan site, and the registration of creation of a collateral for the above loan site was completed. The total construction cost was expected to have been KRW 1.8 billion, but it was difficult for Defendant B to obtain additional loans by offering the above loan as security and obtain additional loans to continue the construction due to the failure to secure more than KRW 900,000,000,00, and Defendant A was well aware of this. Accordingly, the Defendants did not have any intent or ability to complete the registration of creation of a collateral security under the above agreement with the victim without bearing the burden of registration of creation of collateral security.
The Defendants are victims and the victims.