The Defendants, not guilty, dismissed the application for compensation by the applicant for compensation.

1. The summary of the facts charged: (a) The Defendant and D, on February 19, 2014, borrowed KRW 110 million from the victim I, the representative of the KH in the agreement to sell apartment units as security, with the directors G of the Eunpyeong-gu Seoul apartment building E-sale company, which is a sales agent for the apartment unit; (b) however, on February 19, 2014, the said apartment unit sales contract was borrowed from the victim I, the representative of the K in the agreement to sell the apartment units, but the said apartment units did not properly run the sales business,

As the Defendant was in need of funds for the distribution agency business of the J shopping district located in Suwon-si, which was in progress at the time, on May 9, 2014, the Defendant loaned KRW 30 million to the victim with the contract deposit in the Gyeonggi-si located in the Gyeonggi-si, and on February 9, 2014, repaid the interest agreed with the principal amount of KRW 110 million between the loan and the loan on February 9, 2014.

In the event that it is not possible to repay KRW 60 million by May 26, 2014, K will transfer all rights, such as deposit money and operating rights, to K, operated by K, to K in Gangnam-gu Seoul.

“A false statement” was made and around that time, K was prepared in the name of performance agreement with the debtor, joint and several liability debtor, and in the name of K.

However, in fact, the Defendant did not have any intention or ability to pay money within the agreed period, such as that the Defendant borrowed money from K and D, and that the Defendant had no intention or ability to pay money within the agreed period, such as that the seizure procedure is being conducted by creditors.

Nevertheless, the defendant deceivings the victim as above and transferred 30 million won to the K account under the name of the victim.

B. Defendant B is a person who actually operates N in the real estate leasing business, and Defendant A is a person who is in charge of practical affairs, such as entering into a contract, while serving as a director of the said company.

On December 2, 2016, the Defendants conspired to acquire money by deceiving the victim C that they came to know through the O.

1) a nominal fraud of guarantee.