However, from the date of the final judgment of this case, each of the above two years against the Defendants.

In collusion, the Defendants conspired, on July 3, 2015, to the victim D at a mutually infaculation store located in Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si.

“A false representation was made.”

However, in fact, the Defendants did not have the intention or ability to find the victims' children in the hospital.

The Defendants received KRW 20 million from the victim, i.e., the Plaintiff’s her husband E bank account in the name of Defendant B, KRW 15 million from the Defendant’s husband E bank account on July 13, 2015, and KRW 10 million from the national bank account in the name of the above E on March 17, 2016.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to attract the victim to receive the goods.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ legal statement

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statements made to D;

1. Relevant Articles 347(1) and 347(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act concerning the Defendants who choose to commit the crime;

1. Defendants on probation: Grounds for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Scope of the recommended punishment on the sentencing guidelines: Where one month to one year [the scope of the recommended punishment] is reduced (one month to one year) in the mitigation area (one year from January to one year), or where the punishment is not reduced, or where considerable damage is recovered;

2. Determination of sentence: Suspension of execution of four months of imprisonment - The fact that it is against the law, the fact that the defendant A agreed with the victim, the defendant A did not have the same criminal record, and the defendant B was the first criminal;