beta
Text
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for four months, by imprisonment for ten months, and by imprisonment for eight months, respectively.
However, the defendant.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
Defendant C, a co-principal of the Defendants, from around 2014 to around 2014, became aware of the victim G through F, who was a general manager in the Seoul metropolitan area and a subcontractor of the said construction company, and (i) who was the representative director of the said construction company; (ii) around September 2015, at the State of Pakistan, he was aware of the Defendant B, who requested construction; and (iii) the Defendant A was punished by Defendant C.
Defendant
C From Defendant B, “The J would purchase Pocheon Land and newly construct and sell 200,00,000,000,0000 won per bonds as collateral, if there is only the name of the legal entity to register 6,000,000,000 won per bonds in the name of the legal entity, the bank has already made a prior coordination rate with the bank so that it can obtain a loan of 54,000,000,000 won per bonds as collateral. If the legal entity is leased only under the name of the legal entity, 3% of the amount of loan per one bond shall be paid first, and if all 6 bonds are borrowed, 20,000,000 won shall be paid first, and if all the loans are obtained, 20,000,000 won shall be paid first.” The words “I will use the money borrowed from J in return for lending the name of the legal entity, and Defendant B used the funds for Defendant B’s business with the funds borrowed from the factory construction project.
However, in order to register the above 6 commercial loans as corporate assets and to obtain loans from the bank, it is necessary to submit evidentiary documents, such as the certificate of the full payment of corporate taxes, but at the time, the (ju)E was unable to submit the evidentiary documents due to the unpaid tax amount of 5,200.
Accordingly, Defendant C’s business office located in Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoul around March 10, 2016, stated that while Defendant C and the financial institution loaned money from Defendant B and the victim with good financial standing to pay the said tax, the victim’s business status is not good.