The punishment against A shall be six months, and the punishment against Defendant B shall be determined by a fine of three million won.

Defendant

A was recommended to invest 50 million won in stocks after the university, and transferred 50 million won in the name of the victim E designated by Defendant B to the cam account (F) in the name of the victim designated by Defendant B, but the total of 26 million won was refunded and the principal was not refunded due to investment loss.

1. On December 26, 2016, Defendant A lent KRW 50 million to the victim on July 18, 2016, at the 7-12 Gwangju Dong-gu civil petition office of the 7-12 Gwangju Special Metropolitan City District Court, “The victim on July 18, 2016, but did not comply with the demand for the performance of obligations over several times until the maturity date.

A complaint to the effect that 50 million won and this money shall be paid at the rate of 15% per annum from the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint to the day of full payment, shall be prepared, and shall file a suit against the victim for a claim for the loan, and shall certify, during the pleadings, that "the above principal has deposited 50 million won to E.

“A letter of confirmation of the content of “A”, “I,” shall prove that I have lent O0 million won to E and has not paid the principal by December 23, 2016.

The term "a fact confirmation certificate of the content was submitted as evidence."

However, in fact, according to B’s proposal, the Defendant only remitted 50 million won of stock investment to E’s account in accordance with B’s proposal, and did not lend the above money to E.

However, Defendant 1 was sentenced to the above court’s false statement, and Defendant 2 did not withdraw the above lawsuit on July 28, 2017 and intended to enforce enforcement against the victim’s property by rendering a judgment that “the Defendant (victim) shall pay to the Plaintiff (Defendant) the amount of KRW 50 million with interest of KRW 15% per annum from March 8, 2017 to the date of full payment.” However, Defendant 2 did not intend to enforce enforcement against the victim’s property by withdrawing the lawsuit on July 28, 2017 after the victim’s appeal.

Accordingly, the defendant deceivings the court.