Within six months of imprisonment for A and B, for four months of imprisonment for Defendant C, for Defendant D and E, respectively, for eight months of imprisonment.

Defendant

A From February 2014 to July 2014, Defendant B was from March 2014 to September 2014; Defendant C was from March 2014 to June 2014; Defendant D was from February 2014 to November 2014; Defendant D was from February 2014 to November 2014; and Defendant E was from May 201 to November 2014 to from May 2014 to from May 30, 2014 to from the point of J Co.,, Ltd. to each insurance solicitor.

The victims are several teams that sell insurance products through a consignment contract with multiple insurance companies, and K branches are composed of several teams. Each team is composed of the team leader and team members who are insurance solicitors, and each insurance solicitor is paid new contract fees and insurance maintenance allowances at the time of entering into an insurance contract, and the team leader has operated the structure that additionally receives organizational fostering allowances, etc.

When concluding an insurance contract as above, the Defendants: (a) concluded a false insurance contract by lending the personal information of those who did not actually purchase the insurance from the injured; and (b) received allowances by paying insurance premiums one to three times, and (c) received allowances by effective payment and reimbursement.

1. On March 24, 2014, Defendant A prepared a false subscription for an insurance contract as if L, which is a son at K branch, purchased a cancer insurance contract which is 57,330th of the monthly payment of the modern marine insurance, and submitted it to the staff in charge of the victimized person.

On April 25, 2014, the Defendant received KRW 204,091 from the injured party for new contract fees and insurance maintenance allowances on April 25, 2014, from the time of receiving KRW 204,091 from the injured party, and from July 25, 2014, the Defendant received KRW 22,40,348 in total under the pretext of new contract fees, insurance maintenance allowances, etc. over 35 times in total, as shown in attached Table 1 re-insurance table 1.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

2. Defendant B: (a) on April 2014.