A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On August 22, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of four months of imprisonment for embezzlement at the Seoul Central District Court, and the judgment became final and conclusive on October 31 of the same year.

As of August 2014, the Defendant shall take over KRW 300,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0000,000,0000,000,000

8. 20. The payment was made and the remainder of 20 million won was made through a loan of an alcoholic beverage company and agreed to pay the balance of 270 million won to the Joint E-Management Monitoring.

1. In the foregoing “D” around August 20, 2014, the victim F, a construction business operator, who is a construction business operator, under the direction of the Defendant, through E, in addition to the indictment charged by the Defendant, has decided to take over a public restaurant, and the interior works have changed. Of the construction cost, one-third of the construction cost shall be paid on the beginning date of the construction and the remainder of the construction cost shall be paid after the completion of the construction.

The phrase “D” means that the same person should carry out construction works, such as removal of interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior of “D”, typology, electricity, glass, etc.

However, in fact, at the time of Defendant D’s acquisition of the above “D” with financial resources, there was no other method than paying the construction cost as operating funds such as its profits, and the funds to take over the above “D” were rare, and the remaining funds were not paid to the said “D” owner B, who was the owner of the said “D, with only KRW 5 million, out of the above contract deposit, and there was no specific plan or method for raising the remainder of the acquisition, and thus, there was no intention or ability to pay the said victim the construction cost.

Although there are some circumstances, the defendant is a person who is erroneous as being able to receive the construction cost during the construction work or after the completion of construction work.