A Imprisonment with prison labor for eight months and for six months, respectively.

(2) the date of this judgment.

Defendant

A: (a) one person who has opened a deposit passbook (hereinafter referred to as the “house subscription passbook”) from the person who owns the deposit passbook (hereinafter referred to as the “house subscription passbook”); and (b) the Defendant B offered to sell a certain amount of money to the person who opened the house subscription passbook by paying a certain amount to the person who opened the house subscription passbook to sell the savings passbook solicited by the Defendant A; and (c) the Defendant B offered to sell it to a third party.

No person shall transfer or acquire the status to be supplied with housing, resident savings certificates, etc. in order to acquire or have to acquire the supply of housing constructed and supplied pursuant to the housing Act.

Nevertheless, the Defendants conspired as above on April 2017 to receive the subscription passbook from G at the F coffee shop located in the Dong-gu, Seosan-si, Seosan-si, Seosan-si, and deliver 5 million won in cash at the seat, and then take over the obligation of 20 million won that G bears to H.

The commitment was undertaken.

As a result, the Defendants paid KRW 25 million to G, and acquired the passbook in the name of G.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ legal statement

1. Application of the Act and subordinate statutes written in G among the suspect interrogation protocol to the Defendants

1. The Defendants: Article 96 Subparag. 2 and Article 39(1) of the former Housing Act (amended by Act No. 14344, Dec. 2, 2016; hereinafter “former Housing Act”); Articles 96 Subparag. 2 and 39(1) of the same Act; Article 30 of the Criminal Act; Articles 30 of the Criminal Act; the choice of punishment for imprisonment

1. Defendants subject to suspended execution: The conditions unfavorable to the Defendants on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (the following conditions favorable to the Defendant among the reasons for sentencing): The same criminal records and Defendant A5 times, and Defendant B 4 times in the period of suspended execution. Defendant A repeats the crime during the period of suspended execution. The circumstances favorable to the Defendants are recognized as erroneous and reflective. There is no benefit derived from the crime. Inasmuch as there is no same kind of criminal records, the degree of participation in the crime, etc., are comprehensively included in the