A shall be punished by a fine for negligence of KRW 2,000,000, and by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The Defendants were punished by fine.

On December 9, 2016, Defendant B was sentenced to 10 months of imprisonment for a crime of fraud at the Suwon Friwon, and the judgment became final and conclusive on February 16, 2017.

Criminal facts

Defendant

B The name of Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D is a person operating Yeongdeungpo-gu D, F is a person in charge of distribution business in E, and Defendant A is a person operating G agency.

Defendant

B and F began their business in the absence of business funds, and Defendant A, despite the supply of goods equivalent to KRW 10,000,000,000,000 to E, was not paid at all, but was well aware of the financial situation of E, and decided to introduce customers upon F’s request. Ultimately, Defendants were willing to receive goods from customers without the ability to pay the price.

1. F will pay KRW 10 million to the victim H’s staff member I, who was introduced by A at the office of Central Police Officer E on May 201, 201, for the supply of e-mail 100 boxes, non-4.5 101 boxes, non-t 2.7 80 boxes, and Shagu 50 boxes.

However, it is now said that the credit transaction was defective because there is no money, and as the defendant B was refused from the I, the defendant B lent a family deposit account on July 30, 201, which is the payment date of the K issuance from the J (U.S.) which is the date of the K issuance, and put it to F, and "the person who is entitled to pay the price of the goods, return the price of the goods to J," and "the person who is entitled to pay the price of the goods, and return the price of the goods to J," and the F made the victim enter into a contract for the supply of goods with E.

However, in fact, as mentioned above, the Defendant and F knew of the fact that there was no surplus funds, and that it is difficult for the Defendant and F to properly settle the household check due to the lack of knowledge of the J’s personal information and distribution process that they lent the household check, and therefore, there was no intention or ability to pay the price for the goods even if they received the goods from the injured party.

In collusion with the defendant and F, the defendant and F, as mentioned above, deceiving the victim, thereby deceiving the victim.