logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2009.11.05 2009고합185
특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(사기) 등
Text

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for three years and for two years and six months, respectively.

except that from the date this judgment has become final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A is the actual operator of E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant company”) established on April 18, 2001 for the purpose of manufacturing, installing, and constructing, etc. ESD semiconductor traffic signal, etc. (vehicle, pedestrian traffic signal, etc.) and Defendant B works as the head of the instant company from March to April 2006 upon Defendant A’s request.

1. The Defendants conspired to:

A. Although it is necessary for the Administrator of the Small and Medium Business Administration to pass a factory examination by the Gyeonggi-do Small and Medium Enterprise Administration to obtain performance certification under the Promotion of Small and Medium Enterprises and Encouragement of Purchase of The company's LD Traffic Signals, etc., if the application for performance recognition was rejected on April 30, 2007 due to the failure to pass the first factory examination, it is decided to pass a factory examination by the method of obtaining additional points when the factory examination is conducted by the Korea Industrial Technology Promotion Association (hereinafter "Korea Industrial Technology Promotion Association") after obtaining recognition of an organization exclusively in charge of technological development from the Korea Industrial Technology Promotion Association. On April 207, 2007, the fact at the office of the company of this case did not work as the employee of the company of this case and there is no plan to work as the employee of the company of this case as the employee of the company of this case, despite the fact that the F is not a department exclusively in charge of technological development of the company of this case, it is found that the employees of the company of this case were falsely equipped with the Seoul Industrial Technology Association of 20.

arrow