beta
Text
Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
However, each of the above punishments shall be executed for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
Defendant
A is a person who operates F, and Defendant B is a person who is engaged in the distribution business, and Defendant A and Defendant B are married to the couple, and Defendant C is a person who is referred to as a person who deals with a minor and small work at the site of Defendant A at the site of the company.
Even if the Defendants received the money related to the right to operate the Hab restaurant from the victim G, the Defendants did not have any intention or ability to grant the right to operate the 500 apartment building in Daegu H because they did not receive from the I company any orders from the I company.
Nevertheless, on May 2012, at the K cafeteria operated by the victim G in the G of the Gyeongdong-gun, the Defendants attempted to acquire money from the victims, by making a false statement with the Defendant B and C, to the effect that “A cafeteria will resume the 500 apartment construction of the Daegu H 500 apartment construction, which was interrupted by the I company president L, and was executed in M, and was executed in M, at the construction site of the construction site of KRW 5 million.”
1. On July 18, 2012, Defendant C was transferred from the victim the amount of KRW 5 million to the account in the name of N in the name of Defendant C, a Daegu bank in the name of Defendant C, because the victim was found to be the victim on July 18, 2012, with the approval of the President “A” and the private placement. This small amount of money is not managed by the President, and thus, the Plaintiff was sent from the victim the amount of KRW 5 million to the account in the name of N in the name of Defendant C.
2. Defendant C received remittance of KRW 5 million as stated in paragraph (1) and then returned to the victim on October 2012, Defendant C makes a false statement to the effect that “I would not obtain to the other party the same amount of money that I would receive from the other party, and if I would have the same person, I would be entitled to have the right to operate the road according to the amount of KRW 17,00,000,000,000.” Defendant B also sought at a restaurant operated by the victim on October 20, 2012.