E Imprisonment for five years, Defendant I, J and L respectively, and Defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment for one year and six months, and Defendant A by imprisonment for ten months.

[B] Defendant L was sentenced to two years and six months of imprisonment and a fine of six billion won at the Seoul High Court on August 30, 2007 due to a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (tax), and completed the execution of imprisonment on May 7, 2009.

1. Defendants E, L, and A committed fraud together with the Defendants, and Defendant A’s management performance of “D”’s duds, duds, and the state facilities that keep curios in the past regime; Defendant E is a manager in charge of managing the duds of “D” for the past regime’s secret funds, duds, and curios; Defendant E is a person in charge of managing the duds of “D” for the state facilities that keep curios, and Defendant L can purchase the duds at a lower price than the market price if Defendant E, who is one’s form of punishment, is a duds to the neighbors.

I wanted to play a role to attract.

Since then, Defendant E, L, according to the above mother on April 25, 2012, invested KRW 160 million in AG located in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government AF to the victim H, AI, and J, Defendant E, and L, as the above mother, will take out and sell the non-data framework managed by the state agency “D” where the money of the past regime is kept, duds, curios, etc., and then obtain profits of KRW 1 billion within one month.

The phrase “ makes a false statement.”

However, there is no state agency “D” that has been kept in custody of the past regime, and even if the Defendants received the purchase price from the victims as above, they did not have the intent or ability to request the victims to have the purchase price.

On April 27, 2012, the Defendants: (a) had induced victims; (b) had 10 copies of the check issued by Hana Bank on April 27, 2012 as the purchase price; and (c) had transferred KRW 60 million to the Nonghyup account in the name of the Defendant L’s wife AJ on the same day.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to induce victims to receive goods.

2. Defendant E, L, I, and I.