Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor of one year and four months, and Defendant B shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor of ten months.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A is the actual operator of theC, and the representative director of the (State)C.

On January 27, 201, the Defendants conspired with each other, at the (ju) C Office in Jung-gu Seoul, Seoul, on January 27, 2011, Defendant A concluded a contract for remodeling construction of a new underground store between the Busan subway Station and the Mine Station, and then subcontracted the electrical construction at our company to the victim E., so there is a difference in the cost of issuing a performance bond. In addition, if the construction starts and takes money within three months, the Defendants would pay 40 million won interest per month, and the principal will be repaid three months after the business fund.” Defendant B said, “I would know about how much it is about how much about 140 million won in our business,” and Defendant B said, “I will not know about how much it is about how much about how it is about, how much about.”

However, in fact, the Defendants did not have any particular property and the above state that they did not pay profits because they did not have any actual record of receiving orders for construction and remodeling works, and there was no approval of the execution design drawings for the construction and remodeling works of the above Busan Urban Railroad underground. In addition, the state of F, claiming that the Defendants concluded a subcontract, one of the joint implementers of the above construction works, was in a state of influence as to the commencement of construction works. Since the Defendants already received the expenses for issuing the performance guarantee certificate from the non-indicted G, they did not intend to use them as the cost for issuing the performance guarantee certificate even if they did not intend to receive money from the victims as the cost for issuing the performance guarantee certificate, and there was no intention or ability to pay part of the above construction works to the victims

From January 31, 201, the Defendants deceptioned the victims as above and issued the performance guarantee certificate to the bank account in the name of Defendant B.