Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On December 2, 2012, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim B at a mutually unclaimed restaurant located in the Yansan-gu, Jeonju-si, Jeonju-si, that “The Defendant contracted to the victim B for the construction near the Yansan-gu, Jeonju-si, Seoul-si, Seoul-si, for the construction of a road expansion additional construction project ordered by the Jeonju-si.” The Defendant changed the cost of removing and restoring the road and removing the house and removing the roadside trees in the construction section to accept the repair of the road and the repair of the roadside trees.”

However, the defendant did not have the intention or ability to accept the above construction contract for the victim.

The defendant was obtained from the victim in cash 2.4 million won on the 18th of the same month for the purpose of introducing it.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness B and F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statements concerning B and F;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Judgment on the Defendant’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The Defendant borrowed KRW 3 million from F, and received KRW 2,40,000,00,000,000 from F, from F, and paid KRW 2,000,000,00,000,000,000,000,000,000. 2) F, upon the Defendant’s doing the said construction, the Defendant was unable to perform the said construction

3. Ultimately, although the Defendant borrowed 3 million won from F, the Defendant did not receive money for the purpose of introducing it.

2. According to each of the above evidence, the defendant can be found to have received the introduction fee by deceiving the victim B to accept a subcontract from E. Thus, the above argument by the defendant is without merit.

The reason for sentencing is that the defendant does not object to the crime of this case and is consistent with his defense.

The defendants have the same criminal records as follows:

- A fine of one million won shall be imposed for fraud on December 11, 1996, - a fine of 1.5 million won on September 26, 2013.