Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, from the date of the conclusion of the judgment, each of the above defendants is against the defendants for one year.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A and Defendant B are married couples, who are practically managing Defendant A’s mother, and Defendant A is operating the business, and Defendant B has been in charge of accounting such as fund management.

C operated by the Defendants: (a) from May 31, 2014 to July 30, 2014, the Defendants supplied the amount equivalent to KRW 430 million, including steel, from May 31, 2014 to July 30, 2014; (b) but did not pay the amount; (c) the victims received a payment order from the Daegu District Court on February 13, 2015 to KRW 341,727,019 from the Daegu District Court on March 14, 2015; and (d) on April 30, 2015, seized corporeal movables owned by the Defendants under the Daegu District Court Decision 2015No1573, Apr. 30, 2015, the Defendants paid part of the price to the Defendants to withdraw the seizure of the said corporeal movables.

From June 2015, the Defendants made a false statement that “F, the representative of the victim, paid KRW 15 million in accordance with the repayment plan, and withdraw the seizure of the test to pay the price for each month according to the repayment plan,” to the victim’s office located in the Dalbuk-gun E.

However, at the time, C applied for rehabilitation against C at the Daegu District Court around July 29, 2015, based on KRW 10,414,543,00 for assets and liabilities KRW 1,976,458,00 for assets and KRW 10,414,543,00 for assets. Thus, even if the seizure of corporeal movables was withdrawn from the victim, the Defendants paid KRW 15,000 to the victim as the cancellation of seizure, and did not have any intention or ability to repay KRW 20,000 for each month according to the repayment plan.

From July 9, 2015, the Defendants: (a) by deceiving the victim; (b) withdrawn the seizure of the Daegu District Court 2015No. 2015No. 15733; and (c) obtained pecuniary benefits equivalent to KRW 15,310,000, the amount equivalent to the security amount.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. The prosecutor's statement concerning G;

1. The police suspect interrogation protocol of H;

1. Each police statement concerning G and F;

1. The original of each payment order, each repayment plan and each disbursement certificate;