However, with respect to Defendant A, it shall be for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

[criminal power] Defendant A was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor and two months for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act at the Seoul Eastern District Court on January 30, 2007, and the judgment became final and conclusive on August 17, 2007. On July 19, 2007, Defendant A sentenced two years of suspension of execution to six months of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Suwon District Court on July 27, 2007. The judgment became final and conclusive on July 27, 2007. On December 30, 2010, Defendant A was sentenced to one year of imprisonment with prison labor for a crime of fraud at the Seoul Central District Court on February 18, 2011.

Defendant

B On July 5, 2002, after being sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year for larceny, etc. at the Seoul District Court, on September 3, 2004, the Seoul Southern District Court sentenced 8 months to imprisonment for violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (even at night), etc. at the Seoul Southern District Court on September 3, 2004, and sentenced to a suspended sentence of the above imprisonment on October 28, 2005 and the remaining period of the suspended sentence was expired on February 7, 2006. On April 13, 2007, the Seoul Southern District Court sentenced 1 year and 6 months to imprisonment for violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint conflict) at the Seoul Southern District Court on August 27, 2007 and became final and conclusive on August 27, 2007.

【Criminal Facts】

1. Around May 3, 2006, Defendant B entered into a sub-lease contract with the above entertainment tavern in order to prepare for the reasons for E on the ground that he is given the convenience of the case where he is subject to criminal punishment instead of Defendant B by paying KRW 3,00,000 each month following the lease of the entertainment tavern in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

Defendant

B From that time, in operating the D entertainment tavern on the ground of the above B's branch office, the customers who had been induced by the "acscams" have been engaged in a business by assaulting and threatening the customers in a breath manner.

Defendant

A In the case of Defendant B’s dual dynamics, when the daily business is completed as a result of examining Defendant B’s dual dynamics in accordance with the direction of Defendant B, Defendant B shall be deemed to have been parked in the vicinity of D entertainment taverns.