Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor of two years and six months, and Defendant B shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor of two years.

However, from the date when this judgment has become final.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

B was the owner of the aggregate of 567 square meters of land in Gwangju City L, M, N, andO (hereinafter “instant land”). Defendant A is the wife of Defendant B.

On September 4, 2011, the Defendants stated Q and Q only as the victim in the house of the Defendants in Gwangju-si and in the indictment of Q and its wife I in the vicinity of the instant land. However, the defrauded and the victim in the instant case appear to be Q and Q I, and thus, they should be corrected accordingly.

This is not a substantial disadvantage to the defendants' exercise of their right to defend.

The instant land adjoining to national highways 3 lines is sold at KRW 1.4 billion, and it was concluded with Q Q to newly construct a factory building that may engage in wholesale and retail business of manufacturing machinery parts on the ground (hereinafter “instant contract”). Q would remove the rail rails installed on the side of the third line of national highways adjoining to the said land and open and make a road passage (road). Construction permission was also granted on the premise that construction on the front end of the building to be newly constructed on the said land by a vehicle passage. On the premise that construction on the front end of the building to be newly built on the said land was built, the instant land was removed on the third line of national highways, and then the said land was a land on which the entrance of national highways may be built and the middle rupture may be installed, such as a “Rcafeteria” on the said land.

However, in fact, national highways 3 lines connected to the land of this case could not obtain permission for the construction of access roads to national highways since the zone prohibited to connect national highways and local highways to the intersections adjacent to the intersections, and the defendants did not have the intent or ability to open the access roads (sections) connected to national highways 3 lines from the top of the building newly constructed on the land of this case.

As above, the Defendants conspired to induce Q and then enter it into the bill of indictment from Q and I on September 5, 201 to October 20 of the same year.