A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On December 8, 2016, the Defendant: (a) concluded a contract for construction of a factory with B’s construction cost of KRW 506,00,000 on the land of E and E (hereinafter “instant land”); (b) around July 31, 2017, the said construction was completed; (c) the Defendant paid only KRW 330,000,000 to the victim for construction cost, and did not pay the remainder of KRW 167,420,000.

On November 3, 2017, the victim applied for a provisional attachment of KRW 167,420,000 for the ownership of the instant land and new factory buildings in the Suwon District Court's Ansan Branch (2017Kadan3014) around November 3, 201, and received a provisional attachment order around the 13th day of the same month, and registered provisional attachment around the 15th day of the same month.

Around January 16, 2018, the Defendant: (a) falsely concluded that “The Defendant would first pay KRW 50 million to the said D; (b) would cancel a provisional attachment; (c) would obtain a loan from a bank as collateral on the instant land and pay the balance in full, if the provisional attachment is cancelled; and (d) remitted KRW 50 million to the victim’s account around January 16, 2018.

However, in fact, the Defendant had the obligation to pay KRW 500 million at the time of provisional seizure, and even if the victim had cancelled provisional seizure, he thought that the land in this case was loaned as collateral and used as repayment of obligation, etc., so there was no intention

Nevertheless, on January 16, 2018, the Defendant, by deceiving the above D as above, had the victim cancel the above provisional seizure, thereby acquiring property profits equivalent to KRW 167,420,000 in the amount of the claim for provisional seizure.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. The prosecutor's statement concerning the F;

1. The Defendant asserts that a person who entered into a contract with the victim for construction works is F, but the Defendant and F determined that the Defendant and F enter into a contract for construction works.