사기등
1. Defendant A’s imprisonment with prison labor for three years and six months and fines for 1,00,000 won, Defendant B’s imprisonment for three years and Defendant C’s imprisonment with prison labor for one year.
Punishment of the crime
[Majority Offense] Defendant D was released on May 2, 201, and the parole period on November 8, 2014, when he was sentenced to four years of imprisonment due to robbery, etc. at the Suwon G method Board on January 26, 201, and he was released on May 2, 2014.
Defendant
G on July 9, 2009, the Seoul Northern District Court sentenced one year and six months of imprisonment for breach of trust, and February 11, 2010 to three years and six months of imprisonment for a crime of fraud, etc. at the Seoul Northern District Court, which was released on August 14, 2013 and the parole period expired on February 25, 2014.
[B] On March 23, 2017, Defendant B was sentenced to the suspension of the execution of six months of imprisonment with prison labor for special larceny by the District Court of Jung-gu on March 23, 2017, and the judgment became final and conclusive on March 31, 2017.
Defendant
C was sentenced to ten months of imprisonment for fraud at the Incheon District Court on April 21, 2016, and the judgment became final and conclusive on July 15, 2016. On December 7, 2016, the Incheon District Court sentenced four months of imprisonment for perjury and became final and conclusive on February 16, 2017.
Defendant
on April 21, 2016, K was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 4 months for aiding and abetting fraud by the Incheon District Court, and the judgment was finalized on April 29, 2016.
I. As of the 2017 Highest 1212, 2017 Highest 1278, 2017 Highest 1320 Highest 20, 2017 Highest 1805 Highest 2017 Highest 2017 Highest 2017 Highest 1212, the criminal facts related to the criminal facts are collected to be stated.
1. Facts charged in the case of Defendant A, B, E, F Defendant A, B, and E at the order of 2017 Godan 1212
1. A. (1) and 2017 High Order 1278 against Defendant F. On September 2013, the Defendants and AD set up a “AE site” with appearance similar to that of the Escro (Safety Settlement Site) settlement site (Safety Settlement Site) where the goods are delivered to a third party and the goods are confirmed and money is paid to the seller, posted a notice as if they were to sell specific goods on the Internet NAV “SB” car page, and then, the victim who reported and contacted the writing as a specific account of money on the false Escro settlement site.