A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, as the representative director of Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government “C and 33(State) D” located in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, received the victim E from a person who attends the same church, and had his parent engage in his construction business, and had much construction work that he had followed, and had much construction work that he had followed.

1. On January 1, 2016, the Defendant called the victim at the above D office and stated in the indictment that “The prosecutor ordered remodeling of commercial buildings within the F in Seongbuk-gu, Seongbuk-gu, Seongbuk-gu, to the extent that it does not disadvantage the Defendant’s right of defense,” in light of the facts acknowledged by the victim’s statement in this court and the investigative agency’s statement, the Defendant stated in the indictment that “the prosecutor ordered remodeling of commercial buildings within F in accordance with the statement at the prosecutor’s office (not on 129 pages of investigation records, not remodeling, but on the other hand, removal of the shop at the same time).” However, the charge is corrected to the effect that “the prosecutor ordered remodeling of commercial buildings within F in this court to the extent that it does not disadvantage the Defendant’s defense.”

A false statement was made to the effect that, if the construction cost is leased, the interest will be paid by calculating it within three months.

However, in fact, the commercial building construction in F referred to by the defendant was not permitted even at the time of conditional resolution under the premise of the change of design and the securing of additional space in the process of deliberation by the competent authority, and it was unclear when the construction is commenced due to the financial condition of the owner of the building, and it was not possible for the defendant to directly remove the building.

In addition, the Defendant was unable to repay the existing debt amounting to KRW 15 million at the time, and was in progress with the procedure of debt settlement by the Credit Counseling and Recovery Commission, and was not paid the cost of construction from another construction site owner, and there was a very poor financial situation.