2.Provided, That this judgment shall not apply.

Defendant

A on November 15, 2013, after being sentenced to a two-year suspended sentence to six-month imprisonment with prison labor for property acquisition at the Daegu District Court, the judgment was finalized on the 23th of the same month, and on December 10, 2013, a two-year suspended sentence was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint conflict) at the Jung-gu District Court on the 18th of the same month and the judgment became final and conclusive on the 18th of the same month.

Defendant

C On December 20, 2013, the Daegu District Court sentenced imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective weapon, injury by a deadly weapon, etc.) and two years of suspended execution on June, 1 year and six months, and the judgment became final and conclusive on the 28th of the same month.

Defendant

D On December 20, 2013, the Daegu District Court sentenced imprisonment with prison labor for one year due to a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective weapon, injury by a deadly weapon, etc.), and sentenced two years of suspended execution, etc. on the 28th day of the same month.

Defendant

A, B, C, D, E, I, J, K, L, and M are members of the staff of the "Ynam University" neighboring the "Ynam University" located in Busan Metropolitan City, and the staff of the "Yak-gu", which is a violent organization that works in the area where the Corporation is densely located, such as entertainment workers, studio, gambly, Dong-dong, Dong-dong, Dong-dong, and Mool-do, which is an area where the Corporation is located.

1. Defendant A, B, C, and D’s joint criminal conduct decided to sell a test “G” car owned by himself at the beginning of 2012 to the victim N(27 years old), a regional violence organization in the mountain area where he had knowledge of the car at ordinary times, and received a part of the sales proceeds, and the vehicle was dryed. However, Defendant A had a good appraisal against the victim who did not contact without paying the remainder of the vehicle.

Defendant

A, around 05:00 on January 18, 2013, around 05:00, the victim had a telephone conversation with the victim through P, a man-made, while drinking alcohol together with the daily behaviors, including Defendant B, C, and D, and had the victim enter the victim into the above restaurant.

Since then, Defendant A.