Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for three years, and for one year, for Defendant B.

However, for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

【2013Gohap58】

1. Defendant A

A. On January 23, 2007, Defendant A requested I to deliver KRW 200,000,000 to the victim F a subcontract for H work awarded in G at the parking lot adjacent to the building in front of the Seoul Central District Court located in Seocho-gu Seoul Central District Court in Seocho-gu, Seoul, to the victim F, and used KRW 200,000,000 for the said victim after receiving KRW 20,000,000 from the said victim and kept for the said victim at his own discretion around that time.

Accordingly, Defendant A embezzled the property of the above victim.

B. Around November 16, 2007, Defendant A made a false statement to the victim M at the L Office located in Sinpo-si L Office in Sinpo-si on the part of Defendant A, “A is the representative of N Co., Ltd., and he/she did not receive the money so that he/she did not receive the money, and only 10,000,000 won in return for the money within a week.”

In fact, Defendant A did not have the intent or ability to repay the money even if it borrowed the money from the above victim because it is difficult to pay the money for the new construction of the O commercial building because the ratio of sales of the O commercial building falls short of 20%.

Nevertheless, Defendant A deceiving the above victim as above and received KRW 10,000,000 from the above victim as the loan money.

2. Defendant A and Defendant B’s joint fraud are the representative director of the J Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “J”) (hereinafter “J”) who started the offer and sale from May 31, 2003, and Defendant B is the head of planning office who exercises overall control over the sale of the instant commercial buildings.

In order to revitalize the sale of the commercial buildings in this case, the Defendants conspired to sell or lease the commercial buildings by making a false and exaggerated advertisement as if the registered brand company became final and conclusive to enter the commercial buildings in this case.