logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2013.06.14 2012고합151
특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(사기)등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for five years.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a real operator of C corporation established for the purpose of housing construction and real estate development, etc., D is a person in charge of the overall management and accounting of the said company as the head of the said company, and E is a person in charge of the affairs such as the selection of removal construction business operators of the said company.

In relation to the G Site Creation Project to be created in the Filcheon-gun, Chungcheongnamcheon-gun, Chungcheongnam-do, the Defendant concluded an entrustment contract with H Co., Ltd. to take exclusive charge of the business affairs such as the selection of the subcontractor, which is the ordering site, with regard to the said G Site Construction Project, and conspired to acquire money from the subcontractor in the name of the performance bond that should be paid to the ordering site by using the right to select D, E and subcontractor.

On November 2009, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim I that “The Defendant will subcontract the removal work amounting to approximately KRW 120,000 square meters for the removal area to KRW 90,000 per square year.” The Defendant changed the performance bond to KRW 500,000 to be paid to H.

However, in relation to the G Site Development Project, there was another ordering authority of H other than H except for H, and LH Corporation, the executing company of the G Site Development Project, entered into an entrustment contract with J on August 17, 2009 for the entrustment related to construction waste disposal, which is the largest scale of the removal work, and even with respect to the remainder of the entrusted project except for the construction waste disposal portion, distributed 70% to the J where the number of residents belonging thereto was more than the total construction area, and thus, the parts of the removal work that the actual Defendant, D, and E could receive from H were very small compared to the total construction area, and are already referred to as the “existing company” of K, L, L, and M.

Since this H paid KRW 500 million in terms of performance guarantee, etc., it is possible to pay such compensation to the existing enterprises for all of them and receive construction works.

arrow