A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is the representative director of C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant company”). On July 8, 201, the Defendant purchased Jeju-si land under the name of the instant company for the new apartment construction project, acquired ownership on August 31, 201 for the purpose of the new apartment construction project, and completed the construction of the apartment by receiving approximately KRW 2 billion from the land and building newly constructed in the agricultural cooperative around February 15, 2012 and completing the construction of the apartment on the ground of the “E” on the ground.

It is intended to sell an apartment after completion of the construction project until September 30, 2012 after the loan has run on the face of the loan. If the construction project is not completed by September 30, 2012, the principal, interest, etc. will be immediately refunded.

'The Court made the decision.'

However, the Defendant: (a) borrowed bonds from J and K to raise purchase funds in purchasing the above apartment site; and (b) did not pay the interest amounting to KRW 820,000,000,000 per month; (c) thereafter, the Defendant did not pay the interest amounting to KRW 10,000,000 per month; and (d) the court rendered a decision to voluntarily commence the sale of the above land around January 10, 2012 upon the request of the mortgagee K; and (e) the construction funds borrowed from the company’s capital or the previous land after the completion of the construction of underground excavation on the above land were in a progress; and (e) there was no uncertainty as to whether to receive the instant land as a collateral due to the decision to commence the sale of the above apartment site, etc.; and (e) there was no preparation for the construction cost to be paid to the contractor, and thus, even if the purchase price was paid by the victim, the Defendant did not have the ability to return the apartment sale price to the victim or to be uncertain.