A Imprisonment with prison labor for a period of two and a half years, for a period of one and a half years, for a period of one and a half years, and for a period of ten months, for each of the defendants C.

(b).

1. Defendant A’s induced person and the Defendant is a person who runs an unregistered credit business under the trade name of the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government I Building 1708.

The Defendant, on the basis of K Building 2708 of the Philippines, proposed that the telephone inducement scheme would pay the amount equivalent to 10% of the profits from loan fraud by means of loan fraud from L in charge of the loan fraud call center(TM). On the other hand, the Defendant had access to the debtor who delayed the Defendant’s loan to the debtor who did not pay the loan, and had the debtor do a legitimate 060 loan consultation work abroad, and had the Defendant induced to transfer the loan to the call inducement scheme of the Switzerland loan fraud center.

On October 2012, the Defendant committed the crime against Victim M with the Defendant’s Credit Business Office located in Gangnam-gu, Seoul Police Officer, who did not pay the Defendant’s loan to the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as 28 years of age) by phone calls, and “I would like to pay off the Defendant with the obligation to pay the Defendant KRW 14 million on behalf of the Defendant’s Credit Business Office located in Gangnam-gu, Seoul.”

On November 6, 2012, at around 20:15, after having gone through the procedure of obtaining a passport with his/her female, the Defendant was on board and departing from the Republic of Korea at the Incheon Republic of Korea on November 6, 2012.

7. Around 07:00, K Building 2708, in the territory of the Philippines, transferred to L who operates a loan fraud call center.

B. The Defendant committed the crime against the victimO, at the office of the Defendant on October 2012, 201, called “a victim’sO (here, 28 years of age) who had been in arrears with the Defendant’s obligation to pay a loan to the Defendant by telephone,” with the purport that “it may be punished by a large amount of money, and there is no doubt about the legal nature, and it shall be repaid KRW 7.8 million on the part of the Defendant’s work.”