A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

1. The Defendant of the instant case of “2017 Highest 334” from November 2014 to May 2016, 2016, when he/she became aware of the Victim F due to the introduction of E, a branch of the Corporation, around November 2015, while working in the Corporation D located in Busan Young-gu, Busan, as the director of the Corporation, from November 2014 to May 31, 2016, he/she would give a subcontract for the construction works

The author tried to acquire money by fraud.

On November 2015, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant would be ordered to receive the construction of the Busan New Port Structures in D in order to receive an order from the victim, but the Defendant would lend the construction to another party.”

However, even though the defendant used the above position as the director of the construction division in D, the defendant did not have the authority or ability to subcontract the above construction to the victim, and even if he borrowed the above money from the victim, he did not have the intent or ability to complete payment.

Defendant deceiving the victim as above and received KRW 2,000,000 in cash from the victim on November 20, 2015, and acquired it by deceiving the victim from May 4, 2016, including the case where the Defendant received KRW 17,500,000 in total until May 4, 2016, such as the case where the list of crimes (1) was followed.

2. On April 2016, the Defendant of the 2017 Highest 1442 case lent KRW 30 million to the Defendant at a restaurant for the operation of the victim H located in the Gu, Changwon-si, Changwon-si, and “The Defendant is expected to receive construction works for the Busan New Harbor structure in D from 120 employees, but the Defendant would make 30 million won potable at the restaurant. If 30 million won is lent to 120 employees, the Defendant would pay KRW 30 million by the end of September 2016.

“A false representation was made.”

However, in fact, although the defendant was using the above position as the director of the construction division in D, the defendant did not have the authority or ability to select the so-called cafeteria because he was merely an employee in the simple contractual position, and even if he borrowed the above money from the victim, he did not have the intention or ability to complete the payment.

The defendant.