A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

(e).

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who, while investing funds, etc. in D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “D”) in which the Defendant’s de facto spouse is a de facto spouse, set up and manages F or G restaurant operated in D as a manager.

On June 24, 2013, the Defendant: (a) failed to receive KRW 43,739,850 for goods; (b) failed to receive payment from F; and (c) was likely to be subject to compulsory execution upon request for payment order and provisional attachment of bonds from the Busan District Court branch; and (d) requested payment order against E to seek the return of loans and unjust gains, namely, the claimed amount as KRW 143,00,000,000, by the Seoul Central District Court 2013j 5075 on July 16, 2013, in the absence of a claim against E.

In order to escape compulsory execution from the victim H Co., Ltd., the defendant caused E to bear false debt amounting to KRW 143,00,000.

Summary of Evidence

1. Entry of the defendant in part in the first trial record;

1. Legal statement of a witness I;

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the copy of an order for payment of loans and the return of unjust profits, which are 2013 tea 5075;

1. Relevant Article 327 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence [the scope of recommendation according to the sentencing guidelines] The ground for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence [the scope of punishment pursuant to the sentencing guidelines] the basic area (6 months to one year) of the four types (e.g., evasion of compulsory execution] [the decision of sentence] E requests a payment order using the I's name in order to escape compulsory execution by the victim H H stock company. Thus, the crime described in the judgment of the defendant is not sufficient to be committed.

However, it is against the defendant's recognition of the crime as stated in the judgment, and there are some circumstances to consider the crime as stated in the judgment, I returned the amount received in the distribution procedure to the victim H Co., Ltd., and the defendant is the same.