Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3 million, and Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1 million.

The above fine is imposed against the Defendants.

Punishment of the crime

In May 2012, the Defendants found 'Ejuk' operated by the Victim D located in Ansan-dong-si, Seoul around the end of May 2012.

6. From April 1, 200 to the above main point to the Dog-si and the chief of office respectively.

1. On June 5, 2012, Defendant A sent a phone call to the victim and sent 200,000 won to the victim.

However, even if the victim receives money from the victim, there was no intention or ability to perform the work in favor of the victim.

The Defendant, as such, deceiving the victim and deceiving him, from that time to that time, is the same year.

7. Until December 27, 200, a total of 6.2 million won was remitted over five times as shown in Appendix 1.

2. On June 5, 2012, Defendant B made a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant sent 200,000 won to the Defendant since there is no expense to go to the Dong-dong because of the absence of the expense to go to the Dong-dong.”

However, even if the victim receives money from the victim, there was no intention or ability to get the victim to work with the chief of office.

The Defendant, as such, deceiving the victim and deceiving him, from that time to that time, is the same year.

7. By October, 100, a total of one million won was remitted over three occasions as shown in the annexed Table 2.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each police interrogation protocol against the Defendants

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a list of savings deposit transactions;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 347 (1) of the same Act concerning the applicable criminal facts, the selection of fines;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for detention in a workhouse;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, each of the provisional payment orders;