beta
Text
1. The defendant A's crime No. 1-b, 1-c, 3-c, and 3-c, imprisonment for a year, for a crime No. 1-2.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
Defendant
A on October 7, 2011, at the Sungwon District Court's Sung-nam branch, sentenced 4 months of imprisonment for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint intimidation) and 2 years of suspended sentence, and the judgment became final and conclusive on October 15, 201.
Defendant
B On October 12, 2006, after having been sentenced to three years of imprisonment for robbery, injury, etc. at the Sungwon District Court's Sungnam branch, and two years of less than two years, the execution of the sentence was terminated in the official prison on October 23, 2009.
Defendant
C On March 30, 2012, in the Sungwon District Court's Sung-nam branch, in addition to being sentenced to a fine of KRW 5,00,000 as a crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint injury) in addition to being sentenced to a fine of KRW 5,00,000, the summary order was finalized twice.
Defendant
D was sentenced to 10 months of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended execution, and 2,00,00 won of fine for the same crime, in addition to the sentence of probation, for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective weapon, deadly weapon, etc.) in support of the Suwon District Court on May 13, 2008.
1. Defendant A
A. Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Organization of Organizations, etc.) (Organization of Organizations, etc.) is an international mathy organization comprised of violent crimes provided for in the Punishment of Violence, etc. Act, such as assault, intimidation, threat, attack, damage, etc. with an amusement shop, etc. including an international market in the male and female city as its major activity area.
Defendant
A, around 22:00, around 22:00 on the date of 2010, through Defendant B, who is the organization of international Mamapia, was aware that the international Mapia was a violent organization, and became a member of the acting group.
B. The Defendants A and K (2012 Gohap557) conspired with K to commit fraud (2012 Mada557) did not have the intent or ability to pay mobile phone usage fees and installment payments for the mobile phone even if they received a mobile phone opened in the name of the victims, the amount of subsidies of KRW 300,000 per week from the new opening of the mobile phone to the victims.