A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for four months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On December 26, 2015, the Defendant was provided with services equivalent to KRW 670,00,000 in total market value from the victim D, on the ground that: (a) around December 26, 2015, the Defendant, while working together with the Defendant at the time, did not pay wages to retired workers; and (b) did not have any intent or ability to pay wages to retired workers; and (c) the Defendant was provided with services in excess of KRW 670,00,000 in total market value from the victim D.

On the same day, the Defendant continued to provide the victim E with a total of KRW 5,70,000,000,000,000,000 in market price, such as the contact with the victim F, and the repair cost of KRW 1,90,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victims, acquired financial benefits worth KRW 14.27 million in total.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement in each police statement made to D, F, and E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a construction machinery rental business certificate;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of punishment for the crime, Articles 347 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 37 former part of the Criminal Act, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Concurrent Crimes [the instant crime is committed before the judgment that the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment for fraud and two years of suspended execution becomes final and conclusive on February 24, 2016, the Defendant, separate from the instant case, was sentenced to four months of imprisonment with prison labor and one year of suspended execution for a violation of the Labor Standards Act in the Incheon District Court’s Vice Branch Branch Office, which became final and conclusive on September 18, 2015, and on February 24, 2016, a crime for which the judgment became final and conclusive on September 25, 2015, was committed on which the judgment became final and conclusive on September 28, 2015, and thus, the instant case was committed on November 25, 2013, and thus, was not subject to a concurrent trial.

Therefore, the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Code will not be applied.

1. Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act 1.