A Imprisonment for two years, for three years and six months, and for six months, for Defendant B, respectively.

except that this shall not apply.

Defendant

B is a person who operates N, and Defendant A operates, a logistics company, and Defendant C is a person who has worked as a N director of Defendant B’s management company.

"2014 Highest 1395": Defendant A, B, and B had no intention to purchase a motor vehicle under the name of the victim F by obtaining an automobile installment loan from the capital company in the name of the victim F, and offered to use the loan for the operating fund of the company run by each person.

Defendant

A In Q located in P in Ansan-si P in August 2013, 2013, "A intended to purchase a motor vehicle and manufacture a wing model, and enter our company to use it for the transportation business. However, A did not request a person who is a condition to receive a vehicle installment loan.

Cp. One kind of license and one kind of license, and the credit rating is good, so that a vehicle can be purchased with a loan of a vehicle in four names, B and B shall be paid, and the above vehicle shall be sold to another person within one to two months and the obligation of the vehicle shall also be transferred to that person, and the Defendants shall have the same year.

8. Around 28. Around 20. 28, the victim issued a letter to the effect that “F will lend only the name of the vehicle for the installment loan, sell the said vehicle to another person within 90 days, and succeed to the installment payment of the vehicle,” and made a false statement to the effect that “F will use the loan as a purchase for a motor vehicle, and that the vehicle purchased with the loan borrowed under the name of the victim will remodel and sell the special lane and take over the installment obligation

However, in fact, from around 2012, Defendant B instructed the employees of the above N Co., Ltd. to the extent that the wages were not paid properly, Defendant A was in short of the operating funds of the above P Co., Ltd., and the Defendants were in the financial situation of each other.