A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

Punishment of the crime

In accordance with the order of time, the case 2014 Godan5682 was first stated in the case 2014 Godan5147, and the part of the facts charged was corrected ex officio to the extent that it does not interfere with the defendant's exercise of his/her right to defense.

On November 3, 2011, the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd., which was to be accepted by C, received civil engineering works from the Dong-dong of the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd., among the new construction works of the E-China High School in the Gu-U.S., and the defendant was in the position of the head of the Construction Co., Ltd

1. Fraud with the victim F [2014 senior 5682] The defendant entered into a contract for a subcontract for civil works with the contract amount of 4.4 billion won, the commencement date of the commencement date, and the payment of 50 million won by the victim as the subcontract deposit amount, with the victim F of the audit of the auditor of the company in charge of the dispute settlement in Seocho-gu Seoul Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, stating that the defendant, around January 13, 2012, "it may commence construction works within one month if a subcontract contract is entered into with respect to the civil works of the E-China High School which the company in charge of the dispute settlement has received," and the victim was issued 50 million won as the subcontract deposit.

However, in fact, the New Construction Corporation of the E-high school could not resume the construction due to the lack of funds, and there was no possibility that the construction would be conducted between the above public works.

In addition, even though the date of commencement of the original contract with the K-A-A-A-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U

Therefore, even if the defendant receives a security deposit from the victim, the defendant did not have the intent and ability to undertake the above civil works on February 10, 2012 agreed upon, and the security deposit is expected to be used for the repayment of office relocation expenses, etc., and if the civil works do not proceed as agreed upon, there was no intention or ability to return the security deposit.

The Defendant, as such, deceiving the victim, and deceiving him from the victim.