beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.
However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
The defendant is a person who has provided a pharmacist with a place to allow him/her to run a pharmacy in a new building when he/she supplies drugs in wholesale to a pharmacy.
On January 22, 2014, the Defendant: (a) heard the horses of having children’s juveniles and hospitals among the 302th floor C7th floor in Namyang-si, Namyang-si; and (b) introduced the said building to E with D, an employee of the sales team of the said building, and introduced the said building, “A person who entered into a sales contract prior to the 103th floor of the said building,” stating that “A person who entered into a sales contract prior to the 103th floor of the said building, may purchase 10,000 won to that person.”
However, even if the defendant and D received 30,000,000 won from the victim, they did not think of it to the prior buyer, and 30,000,000 won was divided into the defendant and D, and there was no fact that the prior buyer demanded 30,000,000 won.
In collusion with D, the Defendant received 30,000,000 won from the victim to the Dong F account in the name of Dong F on the same day.
Summary of Evidence
1. Partial statement of the defendant;
1. Each legal statement of witness E and D;
1. D's statement among the prosecutor's interrogation protocol of the defendant
1. The defendant asserts that the copy of the police statement of E and D, the copy of the sales contract, the copy of the building register, and the sales statement of E and D are only the sales commission for the purchase under favorable terms of 103 of this case, and that there was no deception by the victim as shown in the facts charged.
However, the victim has consistently made a statement that corresponds to the facts charged from the investigative agency to this court, and the content of the statement is sufficient in detail and in detail.
Witness
D In the police, it is argued that the defendant should give 30 million won to the pre-saler in 103.