A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for three months and by imprisonment for one year.

However, this judgment is delivered against Defendant B.

The Defendants conspired to commit the crime of "Ne-sea", which is a method of acquiring money by asking the merchant by telephone to a third party and lending money to a third party or a single-one customer.

"2015 Highest 1673, 2015 Highest 1772, and 2016 Highest 243.

1. According to the Defendants’ joint commission of the crime, Defendant B called “E” operated by the victim D at a place on September 14, 2015, in which around 12:00 on September 14, 2015, Defendant B called “F,” and the victim is a member of Suwon-dong Council, such as President.

Now, because there is no money to go on the side, it will change it by the 16th day of the same month.

The account number is false, “A will be known to I,” and Defendant A called “A would be a FC G, and a FC will transfer money to the Saemaul Bank in the name of B” by phoneing the victim.

However, the Defendants did not have the intent or ability to repay even if they borrowed money from the injured party.

Nevertheless, the Defendants conspired to induce the victim and received KRW 250,000 from the Saemaul Treasury account (H) in the name of B on the same day from the victim, and from October 17, 2015, the Defendants received KRW 1,400,000 from four victims, such as the list of crimes (2) in the same manner as the list of crimes, in the same manner.

2. On October 17, 2015, the Defendant solely committed a crime is a customer who calls to the “J” operated by the victim I at a non-permanent place and is an employee of the low-finite motor vehicle and frequently uses the PyeongtaekJ.

In this context, there was a false statement to the effect that he/she has been engaged in fishing as an island, and that he/she would have been dyped by contact that he/she would have been dyped, and that he/she would have been dyped. If he/she loans only KRW 500,000,000.

However, even if the defendant borrowed money from the injured party, he did not have the intention or ability to repay it.

Nevertheless, the defendant is above.