A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

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

Punishment of the crime

[Presumption Facts] The Defendant was each representative director of D (hereinafter “D”) and E (hereinafter “E”) and was unable to normally operate the company due to lack of funds. Around September 2014, the Seoul Central District Court filed an application for corporate rehabilitation with D and E and completed corporate rehabilitation proceedings on July 22, 2016. On the other hand, on September 22, 2015, the Defendant rendered a decision to abolish the rehabilitation proceedings under Article 286 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act.

[2] On August 8, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around August 8, 2014, at the office of H Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “H”) operated by the victim G in the fifth floor of the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F Building, the Defendant’s financial situation of the Defendant was not good while establishing and extending a factory separate from D; and (b) the Defendant was in need of operating expenses due to the failure of the company.

Therefore, if the company lends money to China because it has arranged a factory in China, it will dispose of the Chinese factory and complete payment.

The phrase “ makes a false statement.”

However, the Defendant entered into a sales contract under which I Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “I”) sells to 14,00,000,000 won a factory located in the area of the Republic of the People's Republic of China. By June 25, 2014, the Defendant received full payment of the purchase and sale contract under the above contract and disbursed as operating expenses such as loans to financial institutions, employees, and transactional goods, etc. The amount of KRW 2,30,000,00 due to the E business loss in 20,000 due to unreasonable factory extension, etc., and there was no intention or ability to demand additional loans from financial institutions upon receiving a demand for early repayment of the loan from the financial institutions, such as employees’ wages, public charges such as four premium, etc., public charges such as bill exchange funds, bonds, etc., and even if having borrowed money from the damaged person, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay the money.

The Defendant, in other words, from the damaged person, to the 54,00,000 won, and the “22.” written indictment on August 25, 2014, is “25.”