A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The father of C and D are between the father of C and the father of C, and the defendant of C and E are the father of the father of C, and the defendant of C are the father of the defendant of D and the defendant of E.

Defendant D, the principal agent of the loan, Defendant C, E, the principal agent of the house, and Defendant A, the application for the loan of interest from a false lessee, in sequential order, conspired to prepare a false lease contract between Defendant D and A, Defendant C, the principal agent of the house to enter into a false lease contract, Defendant C, the role of arranging E, the principal agent of the house to enter into a false lease contract, and Defendant A, the role of receiving fees and providing a house to enter into a false lease contract, Defendant A, the role of lending funds from financial institutions.

Accordingly, the defendant C would lend the house to E in a restaurant located in the Changwon-si on August 2014, 2014, with the amount of KRW 4 million per week by lending the house to E in order to obtain a loan for Jeonwon-si.

In the word, “E” from Changwon-si’s window F loan G heading “E”, and “E” provided the said house to Defendant D to prepare a false lease contract. Defendant D prepared and delivered a false lease contract to Defendant A and E as a real estate brokerage office, and Defendant A submitted a false written lease contract at the center of the victim I bank in Changwon-si, Changwon-si, Changwon-si, Seoul, at around August 14, 2014.

As such, the Defendants conspired with E on August 14, 2014, deceiving the employees of the victim and received KRW 80 million from the victim under the name of the same day loan.

On July 2014, Defendant A, the 2016 highest group of 1618, had experienced economic difficulties and had consulted Defendant D, the bropier, through the J, which was a branch of the loan, and had the intent to receive a loan from the lending company and to obtain a personal rehabilitation or bankruptcy by applying for a loan between D and D.

1. The Defendants conspired on September 18, 2014.