beta
Text
Defendant
A Imprisonment of eight months, Defendant B imprisonment of two months, and Defendant C of six months, respectively.
, however, the defendant.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
Defendant
B On May 21, 2015, the Changwon District Court sentenced four years and four months of imprisonment for fraud, etc., and the sentence became final and conclusive on the same day.
Defendant B, “2015 J. 725,” provided a loan consultation to those who want to obtain a loan, provided a guidance on the procedures necessary for the loan, and provided a false person with a daily “E” through a daily “E,” and provided a loan to those who want to obtain a loan from the lender as if the borrower is an eligible person for the loan, he/she provided a loan from the installment financing company, etc. to obtain profits as a fee.
Defendant
A requested Defendant B to grant a loan, and even though Defendant A was unable to obtain a loan from a financial institution in a normal way due to lack of a certain occupation or income, the Defendants made a false entry of Defendant A’s workplace information, or conspired to have the profits divided by purchasing a vehicle from a lending company after purchasing a loan from the lending company as if the account transaction details were in receipt of monthly wage at the workplace made by falsity.
1. According to the above public offering, Defendant A purchased a HP car from G located in the Masan-gu F at Changwon-si on September 10, 2013, and Defendant A purchased the said car. The fact is that Defendant A purchased the said car, even if purchased the said car, it was disposed of in the way of “one-day tin-time” method, and did not intend to receive the disposal money, and thus, it is not subject to installment financing, and Defendant A did not have an intent or ability to normally repay the loan due to the lack of a certain occupation or income, notwithstanding the fact that Defendant A actually operated the said car and applied for a loan to the victim’s new card company as if Defendant A actually repaid the loan in a normal manner, and then, Defendant A received KRW 29 million from the victim as a loan for installment financing on the same day.
As a result, the Defendants conspired with the victim on February 2.