A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who was working as the site manager of F Co., Ltd., a subcontractor for civil engineering works among the construction works for building sites E, Inc., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., which were located in Incheon City from November 2010 to July 2011.

On July 23, 2011, the Defendant received KRW 25 million from the victim G, who runs the above F, under the name of wage, etc. on August 2011, and received KRW 17 million from the victim, one sheet of payment stating the same from the victim on August 23, 201, and received from the victim on August 201, 201.

After December 5, 2011, the Defendant paid promissory notes in cash at H offices located in Seocheon-si D immediately, and received KRW 17 million from tin to 25 million, and returned the said promissory notes and the payment note to the victim.

Nevertheless, around January 26, 2012, the Defendant filed a claim for an amount of 17 million won against the victim (Cheongju District Court Decision 2012Gau495), along with a written statement of payment in favor of the victim, which was held by Chocheon-si Central District Court 16-2, Cheongcheon-si Branch 16-2, which had been a copy of the said written statement of payment in advance, until now, among the amount of 42 million won agreed upon, and received a favorable decision from the above court that knew of the above facts, but did not go against the intent that it was the wind that the victim lost by responding to the request.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of a witness G, I and J;

1. Determination as to the Defendant and his/her defense counsel’s assertion on a copy of a letter of payment, a copy of a promissory note, a copy of a passbook, and an investigation report (a written complaint

1. On December 5, 201, there was no fact that the Defendant, at the time of receiving KRW 25 million from the victim on December 5, 201, renounced or exempted the remainder of KRW 17 million. Thus, there was no intention of deceiving the court by false assertion.

In addition, the defendant was found to have been seized only.