A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

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

Punishment of the crime

Although the Defendant only served as an employee of a mobile phone production office or an entertainment drinking house, but did not have the skills and capabilities to conduct a test for himself, the Defendant had subcontracted the test work and had the equipment operator do so again, and had the work run a method of collecting fees in the middle. From October 2012 to March 2013, the Defendant leased 15 square meters office on the first floor of the building B in the Nowon-gu, Nowon-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City on the condition of KRW 300,000,000,000 won per month from March 2013, and then carried out a test business after having the appearance of the office by carrying a house such as a spath, spath, and spath, which had the appearance of the office.

1. On December 2, 2012, the Defendant gave a subcontract to the victim D, a business operator, who is the victim of “G”, for the part of the interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior of the F Child-Care Center E, G, and paid the amount of KRW 12 million as the construction cost of the child-care center, KRW 7.5 million as the construction cost of the second floor, and KRW 7.5 million as the construction cost of the second floor and KRW 7.5 million as the construction cost of each floor.

However, the facts revealed that the Defendant did not have any particular property under his own name, and it was in a bad credit standing due to credit loans, etc. from 2006, and that the Defendant was merely 15 million won in short of the amount to be paid from the original contractor, and thus, the Defendant was less than the amount to be paid to the victim. Even if the construction cost was paid from the owner upon completion of the construction work, it was only a vague plan to appropriate it first to the obligation of other facility operators to pay the construction cost to the victim, and the victim was only the so-called so-called “irreshion” that the latter would pay the construction cost under a contract with another facility operator. Accordingly, the victim was scheduled to do so.