A In 6 months of imprisonment, it is against the violation of the exercise of the right in its holding in 4 months of imprisonment.

Defendant

A was sentenced to 10 months of imprisonment with prison labor and 2 years of suspended execution on August 6, 2009 on August 14, 2009 on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes in the Seo-gu District Court Branch of the Daegu District Court on August 6, 2009, and the judgment became final and conclusive on August 14, 2009. On May 3, 2011, the Daegu District Court sentenced 1 year of imprisonment with prison labor for fraud and 2 years of suspended execution and became final and conclusive on May 12,

Defendant

C On January 29, 2009, the Seoul Northern District Court sentenced 6 months of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Act on the Promotion of Game Industry and sentenced 6 months of suspension of execution on February 6, 2009. On February 7, 2014, the Daegu District Court sentenced 6 months of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Act on the Promotion of Game Industry and 2 years of suspension of execution on February 15, 2014.

Defendant

B On January 29, 2009, the Seoul Northern District Court was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment for a violation of the Act on the Business Specializing in Credit, and the judgment was finalized on May 8, 2009.

1. On April 28, 2008, the Defendants conspireds with G agency located in the Daegu-gu Seoul-gu Seoul-gu Seoul-gu, and purchased one HHH car in the name of the Defendant, and agreed to obtain a loan of 33.9 million won from the Defendant Hyundai Capital Co., Ltd. to pay the principal and interest at an annual interest rate of 24% for 60 months, and the victim set up a right to collateral security at a maximum amount of 16.95 million won for the said car.

However, Defendant B and C did not have the intent or ability to pay the above installment properly because they did not have any particular property or income at the time and were in bad credit standing. It was thought that the said passenger car will be given as security to the bond company, and Defendant A also agreed to receive the money in return for lending the name of the Defendant B husband and wife, and entered into a loan agreement for automobile purchase as above, and there was no intention or ability to pay the installment even if the vehicle was purchased in its own name.

The Defendants are the same day as the injured party by deceiving the injured party.