Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months and by imprisonment with prison labor for one year.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

. The appointment of a person;

* At the time of establishment of C around March 2015, B was a bad credit holder, and there is no capital, and A was a business owner name, and A lent KRW 100 million to B as business funds. A has no choice but to have interest in C’s operation as long as it lent money of KRW 100 million to its own parents.

* A was directly in charge of account transfer, etc. while managing accounts in the name of C.

* From the beginning of April 2016 to May 10, 2016, the Defendants did not pay the outstanding amount in KRW 25 million, which was difficult for the Defendants to supply active fishing, etc. any longer under this situation.

On May 11, 2016, the victim began to supply the goods to C continuously after a short-suppering, which is reasonable in light of the empirical rule to view that it is due to the fact that the business owner confirmed a certain guarantee intention, etc. for the payment of the goods from A in the name of the business owner at the short-suping place.

* In fact, A has delivered the victim’s name cards of G Co., Ltd., one’s representative director, and the delivery of the victim’s name cards to the victim, even though A was not in office as representative director at that time, had the intent to have the victim resume the supply of goods by over-refluence.

It is reasonable to view it.

* The injured party may operate Company G at his own meal supper, receive the auction of the D land atHanam-si and repay the outstanding amount as security.

the Commission.

The above statement was made. The above statement was delivered by A to the representative director, the statement was made with the same content as the victim, H who was present at the same day of the same day, and A was allowed to enter an auction at a telephone conversation with the victim on August 25, 2016, but the date of the decision on sale was delayed, but A did not pay the money to be paid.

There is credibility in light of the fact that it refers to that.

* Defendant B shall on April 2016.