A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be paid.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who actually operates D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "D") in Gwangju Northern-gu C building.

Around August 2009, the above D was supplied with materials equivalent to 11,871,750 won from the Victim F Co., Ltd. F (hereinafter "victim Co., Ltd.") operated by E while carrying out the construction of a bridge bridge bridge for the Hamcheon-gun, Seocheon-gun around June 2010, and did not pay the price. In order to receive this on November 15, 2012, the victim Co., Ltd. was provisionally seized with D's specialized construction mutual aid association investment certificate 2012Kadan60 on the 136-Gu unit, Gwangju District Court 2012Kadan60.

On December 7, 2012, the Defendant called to E at the site of the dredging work of Hoan-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Seoul-do, the Defendant was unable to receive the progress payment for the dredging work of the Hean-gun, Seoan-gun, because he did not receive the security of defect repair due to the provisional attachment of the investment certificate on the investment certificate. In order to withdraw the provisional attachment of the investment certificate, the Defendant made a false statement that he would pay KRW 11,871,150 of the credit amount that was not repaid until now with the provisional attachment of the investment certificate.

However, in fact, with regard to D's claim for dredging construction costs of KRW 86,00,000 for the C's Office of the United States Armed Forces, G was subject to attachment and assignment order with the claim of KRW 70,000,000 on October 6, 2012, and H was subject to provisional attachment with the claim of KRW 56,00,000 on October 24, 2012. Thus, even if the victim company withdraws provisional attachment, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to receive payment from the office of the United States Armed Forces for the victim.

As above, on December 11, 2012, the Defendant deceiving E and caused the victim company to withdraw a provisional attachment of the said investment certificate, thereby having D obtain pecuniary benefits that would cause D to own a claim without any burden of provisional attachment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Investigation report, investment certificate; and