A Imprisonment with prison labor for three years and for ten months, respectively.

However, from the date this judgment became final and conclusive, the defendant.

"2015 Highest 1437"

1. At around 17:00 on June 16, 2015, the Defendants’ co-principaled the Defendant’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s residence, and her son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s her son’s her son’s her son’s her son’s her son’s her son’s her son’s her son’s her her son’s her son’s her her son.

The Defendants were frightened on a mobile phone agent with the trade name in the scambling operation of the scambling-gu in the above intimidation, and met the credit inquiry to open the mobile phone under the victim’s name, but when the victim was unable to open the mobile phone under the victim’s name because of the failure to pay the mobile phone charges, Defendant A demanded the victim to “a multi-city mobile phone agent,” and the victim again refused to do so while the victim did not refuse to do so, the victim was frightd off and the neighboring personal body of the victim was frightd and the Defendant A turned on his hand. As such, the Defendants appeared to have taken a heavy attitude toward the victim’s body in the event the Defendants did not respond to the request of the victim, such as “the brightbbbbed bris, so we need to look at the 200,000 won or damages.”

The Defendants, at around 17:30 on the same day, enter the victim as the “J” mobile phone agent located in the Yansan-gu I of the Jeonju-si, and the victim's terminal.