Defendant

A Imprisonment of 10 months, Defendant B's imprisonment of 6 months, Defendant C's imprisonment of 10 months, and Defendant D of 2 years.

Punishment of the crime

- Defendant A, B, and C are the representatives of L in Busan, which are located in K, and Defendant C is the inside director of the corporation N in Busan, which is located in Y, Busan, and Defendant B is the person who intends to work in C.

Defendant

A, around May 31, 2013, entered into a credit transaction agreement with the Korean Bank Co., Ltd. for the purpose of importing fishery products at the main sentence of the Korean Bank, which is located in the 3-dong, Busan City City City, and entered into a credit transaction agreement of 300,000 U.S. dollars for the purpose of importing fishery products.

Defendant

A around August 21, 2014 and August 28, 2014, under the above credit transaction agreement, a L/C was issued from the victim and had the victim pay the victim the sum of 191,446 US$ 36 cent ($ 201,34,564 won in Korea), each of 4,600 in China, and the total of 9,200 US$ 9,200 in China, and after completing the procedures for customs clearance, it was stored in PF warehouse located in Busan, Seo-gu, Busan, and a RR warehouse located in Seo-gu, Busan, with the total of 191,446 US$ 18 cent in freezing, respectively.

Defendant

A, when the victim issues a letter of credit in accordance with a credit transaction agreement, the victim imports the goods within the amount of the credit, and the victim holds the bill of lading for the imported goods as collateral. In this case, the defendant A received a bill of lading from the victim and presented it to N, a forwarding agent, and again received a delivery order, and there was a duty to prevent the decline and loss of the value of the collateral as to the imported goods (the above freezing shortage), such as the delivery of the imported goods, by presenting it to the warehouse operator.

Nevertheless, the Defendants conspired with each other on September 19, 2014 and September 24, 2014, and thus, did not receive a bill of lading due to Defendant A’s failure to pay the import price to the victim, but Defendant A and Defendant B.