beta
Text
Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
However, as to Defendant B and Defendant C, this judgment has become final and conclusive, respectively.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
[criminal record] On November 30, 2015, Defendant A was sentenced to four months of imprisonment as a crime of fraud in the loan support of Suwon Friwon, which became final and conclusive on April 22, 2016.
[2] While Defendant B was an employee of the E Co., Ltd. located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on January 201, 201, Defendant B accepted the amount of KRW 50 million by Defendant A by stating that “When investing in the amount of KRW 50 million in order to implement the construction of officetels in Seongbuk-gu, Daejeon Metropolitan City U.S., Defendant A may receive KRW 100 million.” Defendant B and Defendant B paid KRW 20 million to the ordering person on behalf of Defendant B using PC in order to facilitate the solicitation of investors. Thus, the said E Co., Ltd. paid KRW 120 million to Defendant A, in the future, by means of PC to the effect that “The payment of KRW 120 million to Defendant A” would be made by preparing a false repayment contract, and to encourage investment to Defendant C’s victim as Defendant C.
Accordingly, Defendant A and Defendant C found the victim’s office located in Gwangju-si, Gyeonggi-do around January 20, 201, while showing the “a repayment contract” written as above, and “A invested KRW 20 million in this case.” On March 20, 201, Defendant A and Defendant C would have to receive a refund of KRW 120 million upon completion of the sale of officetels in early 20 million.
If it invests KRW 50 million in the above officetel Corporation, it will give KRW 100 million out of KRW 120,000,000 to be received from B after two months.
“The phrase “ was false.”
However, the Defendants were well aware that E Company did not receive the instant officetel construction, distributed money from the injured party, and then intended to consume the money for their own personal use.
Nevertheless, the Defendants conspired to induce the victim as above, and then acquired 50 million won through the Agricultural Cooperative Account in the name of Defendant A’s wife I on the same day from the victim.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendants’ 1.