A shall be punished by a fine of one million won, and Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of seven hundred thousand won.

The above fines are imposed by the Defendants.

[criminal record] Defendant B was sentenced to one year and two months of imprisonment due to fraud, etc. in Gyeyang Branch of the Jung-gu District Court on October 14, 2016, and the above judgment was finalized on April 6, 2017. Defendant A was sentenced to one year and one year of imprisonment at the Jung-gu District Court on March 29, 2017 and was sentenced to one year of imprisonment due to fraud, etc. on April 5, 2017, stated in Defendant A’s written application for permission to amend the indictment of the prosecutor on April 5, 2017 as “the date of April 6, 2017,” but this is obvious that it is a clerical error or simple error and it is not a substantial disadvantage to Defendant’s defense

The above judgment became final and conclusive.

[Criminal facts] C is a person who is sead with a used vehicle, and Defendant A and Defendant B are prone, and C and the Defendants are in ex post facto relationship.

1. The Defendants and C co-defendants and C posted a letter stating that the Defendants and C conspired from December 1, 2015 to December 08, 2015, “after-sale the post-sale on the Internet, which is a website of high-end and trading sites,” at a studio not exceeding 1studio in the field of strike at the end of each week from December 1, 2015.

However, even if the price of the goods is remitted from the beginning, there was no intention or ability to sell the goods.

In such a way, by deceiving victims E and receiving 3,50,000 won from the said victims to the Agricultural Cooperative Account (F) in the name of C, etc., he/she received a total of 3,180,000 won over 10 times, such as the list of crimes in the attached Table.

2. Defendant A’s sole crime committed on September 25, 2016, at around the place of residence of the Defendant located in G on September 25, 2016, Defendant A disposed of on the phone-based mobile phone-based 2.80,000 won at the Lmons white condition and 2.80,000 won at the school.

The victim H bill of indictment, which reported and contacted “the victim H,” was omitted from the name of the victim, but there is no risk of causing substantial disadvantages to the defendant’s exercise of his/her right of defense, thereby recognizing it ex officio as above.

As the mother is severe, the new fresh, which is a new fresh, shall be the same as the new fresh.