A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.

An applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant 2016 Gohap 618 is the representative of the private business chain D.

On August 21, 2015, the Defendant entered into a new contract for the construction of the above church with the victim G in the F church located in the G G in the G G G, and completed the work price by the victim by April 2016.

The phrase “ makes a false statement.”

However, in fact, the Defendant had no intention or ability to complete the above church construction work, since the Defendant was performing the construction work in the form of prevention of return, such as new construction loan, I church, and K church, due to the shortage of funds in other construction sites, such as the above construction cost, due to the lack of funds.

As can be seen, the Defendant’s deceptions the victim, and made the victim feel, stated that the Defendant’s indictment was “150 million won” in the instant indictment of KRW 150 million on or around August 22, 2015, and around September 1, 2015, but it is apparent that it is a clerical error in the “150 million won,” and even if it is corrected without any amendment to the indictment, it does not seem to have any substantial disadvantage to the Defendant’s exercise of his/her right to defense. Accordingly, the Defendant’s indictment is corrected ex officio.

B, on October 22, 2015, the construction cost of KRW 59 billion has been paid up to three times, respectively, and the total amount of KRW 554 million has been paid up to three times.

In August 2015, the Defendant stated that “The Defendant would pay the construction cost immediately after the completion of the construction work,” to the victim L(54 years of age) at the “K church” located in the Daegu-gu Dong-gu, Daegu-gu, 2015 Police Officers.

However, in fact, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to pay the construction cost to the victim, as the construction work ends, due to the shortage of funds in other construction sites, such as construction Ha in Gyeonggi-si at the time, due to the use of the construction cost at the construction site, etc.

The Defendant is the victim.