A Imprisonment for one year, and each of the defendants B shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

Defendant

B On September 2, 2016, the Ulsan District Court sentenced ten months of imprisonment to be a crime of fraud, which became final and conclusive on September 10, 2016.

1. The sole criminal conduct of Defendant A;

A. The Defendant against the victim E committed as if he were to be the cause of the company that retired from Samsung C&M company located in the Nam-gu, Nam-gu, Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, the Defendant introduced the company F&M company F&B, which is the same as the chairman of the company’s union, and had the victim E work in the above Samsung C&M company, and had the victim E work in the above Samsung C&M company, and had the victim E work in the job placement work cost.

Accordingly, on November 19, 2014, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim “I will get the victim to take a job with money because I and executives are aware of the fact that I and executives are going to a close chemical of Samsung, because I going to go to a close chemical of Samsung.”

However, the Defendant did not have worked in Samsung precise chemistry at the time, and was unaware of the F, and there was no intention or ability to work normally with the above company.

The Defendant, as such, was granted KRW 24,70,000,000 in total under the pretext of job placement work expenses nine times, such as the list of crimes (Ⅰ) in attached Form from the time of deceiving the victim and receiving KRW 2,00,000 in cash from the damaged party to April 28, 2015.

B. On June 2015, 2015, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim G, who was in a fluent relationship with the Defendant at the Seocho-si Kimcheon-si, the residence of the victim G, which was located in the Homan Kimcheon-si, the residence of the victim G, saying, “The Defendant would have ASEAN employed the Defendant as a modern vehicle by requesting it to the J of the Sacheon-do, who is well aware of the modern I.

However, the above J did not have the ability to employ the above K as a state of non-permanent position at the time, and the defendant thought that all of the money received from the injured party as a job referral fee will be used individually, and therefore above K is above.