Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On November 20, 2012, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “When constructing a new house and sending concrete on credit, he/she will settle the price at the end of the following month” to D, the head of the above business division, at the victim C Co., Ltd. office located at the time of stay at around November 2012.

However, even if the Defendant received concrete from the victim company, he/she had no intent to pay the concrete price to the victim company at the end of the next month. From July 2010 to October 2012, the Defendant did not have the ability to repay the price to the victim company by defaulting on national taxes equivalent to approximately KRW 35 million to the National Tax Service and making it difficult to pay the price due to bad credit standing.

The Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim, received delivery from the injured party of concrete 64 square meters worth KRW 5,069,240 in total, five times from that time until January 8, 2013.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of partially the accused by the prosecution;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to D;

1. An investigation report (verification of the same record as the suspect and a report on attachment of the judgment) , a report on investigation (report on attachment of all registered matters of apartment buildings residing in the suspect), a report on investigation (report on attachment of all registered matters of the building constructed by the person under investigation to the person under investigation), a report on investigation (Attachment of credit information) , a report on investigation

1. A complaint asserts to the effect that the Defendant had the ability to pay goods at the time of receiving concrete from the injured party.

However, in full view of the evidence presented in the judgment, the Defendant was in very difficult economic situation, such as national taxes in arrears with other construction cost obligations, and the time when the Defendant agreed to pay each concrete price is not expected to generate new profits.