Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months, and imprisonment with prison labor for six months.

However, this judgment is delivered against Defendant B.

Punishment of the crime

1. The Defendants were aware of the fact that Defendant A had a friendly relationship with C University’s general director D, thereby acquiring money from the victim under the pretext of street funds by borrowing the conclusion of the bus service contract between the victim E (hereinafter “F”) and C University.

On February 2, 2014, the Defendants made a false statement that “The victim is in close relation with the director of the department of the C University D. At present, the C University bus transportation chain H is a good condition in the dispute with C University due to the Dogwon’s color cost and the operation at the time of vacations.” The contract with H also entered into with H. In order to enable F to operate directly without operation. If the contract is concluded, the amount of KRW 50 million is changed. In addition, if the contract is concluded, the amount of KRW 50 million is changed.” Moreover, if the contract is concluded before the contract is concluded, the amount of money needed is first changed.”

However, in fact, the Defendants knew that the contract of carriage of school buses by Cuniversity was made through bidding and that the aforementioned D was a person who is unable to exercise influence over the decision of the successful bidder in the bid process, and even if the Defendant received money from the victim, the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to allow the victim to enter into the contract of carriage of school buses with Cuniversity, and was a plan to use the money received from the victim for personal debt repayment, etc.

As seen above, the Defendants deceptioned the victim and received 400,000 won from the victim’s new bank account under Defendant B’s name on February 18, 2014, and received 26,650,000 won in total nine times from around that time to October 18 of the same year, as shown in the list of crimes in the attached Table.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to attract the victim to receive the goods.

2. Defendant A

A. The Defendant forged a private document to a service contract for commuting buses with C University from the above E.