However, each of the above defendants is against the defendants for one year from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

On January 26, 2012, the Defendants made a false statement to the victim E to the effect that “The Defendants entrusted the sales agency of the office of sales in lots in Jung-gu Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul with the construction of the office of sales in lots, and paid KRW 200 million the sales agency deposit money. If G Co., Ltd., a implementing company borrowed KRW 50 million due to lack of funds, 30% of the shares of the sales agency fee shall be paid, and the principal shall be paid after six months, and 50 million shall be paid at 3% of the monthly interest on the sales agency fee.”

However, in fact, the Defendants failed to pay the above deposit amount of KRW 200 million and did not have an intention or ability to pay the principal and interest.

Defendants, as above, are entitled to KRW 20 million on the same day from the victim’s account in the name of the Defendant B (H) and the same year.

2.2.Around 20 million won was remitted, respectively.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to deception the victim by deceiving the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Partial statement of a witness I;

1. Some statements in the police interrogation protocol regarding Defendant B

1. A copy of each contract for parcelling-out agency, business registration certificate, agreement on the interest of operating expenses, contract for the completion of parcelling-out, joint equity contract, agreement, etc.;

1. Two copies of a record;

1. Copies of each bankbook and details of transactions of bankbooks;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to an investigation report (to hear statements from theJ for reference);

1. Relevant Articles of the Criminal Act and the selective Defendants of the punishment: Articles 347 (1) and 30 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants subject to suspended execution: The main sentence of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (the following sentencing grounds shall be considered as favorable to the Defendants)

1. Defendants of the community service order: The conspiracy of two or more persons of the grounds for conviction under Article 62-2(1) of the Criminal Act in the co-offender relation to the crime requires a certain punishment in law.