beta
Text
[Defendant A] The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.
[Defendant B] The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
Defendant
On April 27, 2012, A was sentenced to two years of suspension of imprisonment for a crime of fraud in the military support of the Jeonju District Court on April 27, 2012 and the judgment became final and conclusive on May 5, 2012.
1. The Defendants (Defendant B) had been operating the KMF in the wife population E around 2010, Defendant B was known from May 201 to around 300 million won due to the transaction company’s default, etc., and Defendant B was unable to seek a cost of KRW 100 million due to the circumstance that Defendant A also supplied to the KMF at that time, and there was a financial shortage of KRW 100 million.
On May 201, the Defendants jointly operated the LAF, and Defendant A, on behalf of Defendant B, secured the supply station of the raw chickens, sold the raw chickens supplied, and offered them to resolve the financial difficulties raised in exchange for the payment.
Defendant
A around June 20, 2011, the Cheongju-gu Office of the Victim G was found to be the head of the I Agricultural Cooperative Gyeyang-gu I agricultural cooperative Ha, which is operated by the Victim G, and the victim stated that “The person who may believe that the system is considerably difficult at present is nothing more than her. I will settle the accounts 15 days after the 15 days of credit supply in order to conduct the I Agricultural Cooperative Hado business. I would like to settle the accounts after the 15 days of credit supply.” In addition, I would like to find the above I Agricultural Cooperative Doz office with the Defendant with the victim as the head of the I Agricultural Cooperative Doz., and I would like to make the victim settle the amount without exceeding 15 days.”
However, the fact is that even if he was supplied and sold with a crub at the time, if he did not preferentially appropriate the payment for the payment of the bill obligations of the F in charge of the payment of KRW 300 million, it is impossible to operate the F in itself. Therefore, it was not only the intention or ability to repay the crub in accordance with the due date agreed to pay the sale price, but also did not inform the victim of such fact in advance.
Defendants.