A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

(e).

Punishment of the crime

The defendant of "2016 Highest 3996" is a person who engages in construction consulting or interior construction work under the trade name of Songpa-gu I and J in Seoul. 201.

On December 23, 2015, the Defendant stated to the effect that, with respect to M in the Victim K and Mapo-si L, the construction period from January 13, 2016 to February 18, 2016, 76,000,000, 10% of the contract amount, 30% of the start payment, 30% of the intermediate payment, 30% of the intermediate payment, 20% of the secondary intermediate payment, and 10% of the balance, the Defendant would complete the construction when concluding a contract for artificial works and paying the construction cost.

However, while operating the above company without any specific property, the Defendant had no intention or ability to complete the construction work properly even if the Defendant received the construction cost from the owner, and received the payment from the owner of the above company, to prevent the so-called return of the personnel expenses, material expenses, and the load payments, etc., which were not paid at a multiple construction site.

The Defendant received 53,200,000 won in total from the victim under the pretext of intermediate payment on January 14, 2016, under the pretext of starting January 14, 2016, 11,400,000 won in part payments, and 11,400,000 won in part payments as part payments on January 21, 2016.

around December 16, 2015, the Defendant called the victim P at the construction site in Gangnam-gu N and the second floor of the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and called the victim P at the construction site for the "O point construction site for the removal," and paid the construction cost.

“.....”

However, in fact, the defendant has the intention or ability to pay the construction cost properly even if the defendant had the victim pay the construction cost in a situation that prevents the so-called return of the personnel cost, material cost, and the cost of the cargo that was not paid at a multiple construction site by receiving the construction cost from the project owners while operating the interior management company without any specific property.