beta
Text
Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
1. Joint crimes with the victim D (2015 high group 330), the Defendants, who are relatives, will be the multiple employees.
In order to commit a crime of "brue" in the name of "fathing" that runs away without being able to engage in any work after receiving a frush from the fathral owner, around 15:00 on June 1, 2015, Defendant B introduced Defendant A to the victim, and Defendant A would be an employee at the above fathal where the fathal owner pays the fathal to the victim.
The defendant B made a false representation, and the defendant B guaranteed the obligation to return the above advance payment to the victim of the defendant A.
As above, the Defendants conspired in collusion to induce the victim, and thereby deceiving the victim, up to 3.2 million won in total under the pretext of advance payment from the victim (=6.2.1 million won on June 1, 2015).
2. The recipient obtained a delivery of 1.1 million won and acquired it by fraud.
2. Each of the Defendants’ crimes against Victim G (2016 high group 838)
A. The Defendants, at around September 24, 2015, are entitled to receive payment within one month from the victim’s “IC” in the operation of the victim’s located in the Chungcheongbuk-gu H, and “IC” from the victim, who works on the part of IC, with payment from the victim within one month.
“.........”
However, even if the Defendants received money from the injured party as a quid pro quo, they did not have the intention or ability to pay the money within one month after they performed the work properly.
As above, the Defendants deceiving the victim as above, and each of them was granted KRW 500,000 to Defendant A and Defendant B to receive KRW 3 million for the same day in advance from the victim.
B. On October 5, 2015, Defendant A told the victim to the effect that “I will complete the payment within one month if I would not pay I or I or I because I or I could not pay I or I or I would retire from a private teaching institute.”
However, if the victim borrowed money, the defendant thought that he will pay interest on the bonds that he borrowed.