beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.
However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
[criminal record] On August 13, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for one year and two years of suspended execution for the crime of forging private documents, uttering of private documents, and attempted fraud at the Seoul Central District Court, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on February 4, 2015.
[Criminal Facts] The Defendant, “2015 Highest 531,” operated a clothing company with a trade name “C,” which was supplied to Japan companies after having been supplied with raw elements on credit from domestic source companies, processed clothing in the Philippines and the Chinese factory.
The Defendant had a debt of KRW 250,000,000 and KRW 300,000,000,000 from the Korea Credit Guarantee Fund for Loans and D. Since the accumulation of deficit from the date of payment due to the delay in the payment period and the defect in products, it was difficult for the Defendant to pay the office rent properly from August 2013. Since around December 2013, the customs clearance was delayed, the delivery was delayed due to defective products and the defect in the orders, etc., and further, around May 2014, the Defendant had no intention or ability to pay the cost properly within KRW 1,50,000,00,00 to the victims even if the amount of the clothing was paid in full by processing and supplying the clothing as the raw body and by supplying it.
1. On December 24, 2013, the criminal defendant against the victim E makes a false statement to the victim E employee H who operates G that “if he/she supplies the original group, he/she manufactures and exports clothes and sells goods, and pays the original unit value after one month,” while he/she received the original unit of KRW 3,924,000 from the victim and received the original unit of KRW 3,924,00 at the market price from the victim, from around December 24, 2013, even if he/she received the original unit from the victim due to the aggravation of the financial situation as above, he/she does not have any intent or ability to pay the original unit.”