beta
Text
Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.
However, each of the two years from the date of the final judgment against the Defendants.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
Defendant
A is the president of the D apartment reconstruction association in Busan Northern-gu, and the defendant B is the representative director of (ju) E.
On August 2012, the Defendants conspired to acquire money under the name of the victim F to give the right to subcontract the removal work, despite the fact that the construction work of the above D Apartment reconstruction project was not selected.
Defendant
B around September 26, 2012, at the office E in Busan Metropolitan Government G Building, “D apartment reconstruction is selected as a construction contractor in relation to the reconstruction, and it is expected that the removal work will be carried out from November 2012, and the PF loans are expected to be carried out by the financial institution. In order for the new designated enterprise to receive a contract for the removal work and the dismantling work, there is a difference in the amount of KRW 150 million in return.” From the victim, the victim transferred KRW 150 million to the national bank account in the name of the defendant B, and delivered KRW 100 million among them to the defendant A.
However, in fact, since the construction work for reconstruction of the above apartment was not selected and the commencement of construction work was not scheduled at all, there was no intention or ability to get a subcontract for the removal work even if the defendants received the above money.
As a result, the Defendants conspired to deception the victim as above and received KRW 150 million from the victim.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendants’ legal statement
1. Application of the police protocol of statement to F;
1. The Defendants: Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act; Articles 347(1) and 347(1) of the Criminal Act; the choice of imprisonment
1. The defendants in a suspended sentence: It is so decided as per Disposition on the grounds of not less than Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (the amount of damage, the amount of fraud, most of the use of the funds by fraud, etc. is deemed to have been used in operating expenses of cooperatives, etc., the defendants agreed with