A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a period of two and half years, and by imprisonment for a period of ten months.

However, as to Defendant B, this is applicable.

Defendant

A and the victim D become aware of around December 2010, and have been living together with them from around 2011 to early 2015, and Defendant B is the friendship of Defendant A.

The Defendants: (a) around the first half of February 2013, the small mother of Defendant A was not in existence; (b) Defendant B decided to engage in the conduct of Defendant A; and (c) conspired to use money in installments after deceiving the victim.

Accordingly, on February 8, 2013, Defendant A was engaged in landscaping business by “F, the father of which is a small father,” and the construction cost was less than KRW 7 billion to the person G.

G It is intended to seize land in the sealed form.

If the seizure is made, 1.3 billion won may be paid as compensation for the land of the smuggling transmission tower.

A false statement was made to the effect that the expenses necessary to seize is lending to a small father, and the call was confirmed to a small mother E.

In addition, Defendant B also 1,30,000,00 won compensation to the victim of the telephone was immediately made.

Upon receiving compensation, he shall pay the money.

1. As seen, the Plaintiff made a false statement to the effect that the Plaintiff was “.”

However, in fact, Defendant A’s small father F or the above construction cost claim did not exist from the beginning. Defendant B was merely a relative who lent the passbook to Defendant A, and the Defendants planned to use the passbook in installments from the injured party, and thus there was no intention or ability to pay the above construction cost.

From March 6, 2015, the Defendants, by deceiving the victim as such, received the remittance of KRW 3 million to E’s account in the same day, and received the remittance of KRW 142,400,000 from that time on 53 occasions, as shown in the List of Crimes.

Accordingly, the Defendants conspired to deception the victim's property by deceiving the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements 1.