Defendant

A Imprisonment for eight months, each of the defendants B, C, and D shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

provided that this ruling has become final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

[criminal power] ① On July 6, 2010, Defendant A was sentenced to 10 months of imprisonment for fraud, etc. at the Seoul Southern District Court (the "fourth month" stated in the indictment is a clerical error) and the above judgment becomes final and conclusive on July 14, 2010. ② Defendant B was sentenced to 10 months of imprisonment for fraud, etc. at the Seoul Southern District Court on July 6, 2010 (the "fourth month" stated in the indictment is a clerical error. The judgment became final and conclusive on July 14, 2010, and was sentenced to 4 months of imprisonment for fraud, etc. at the same court on July 20, 2010, and the judgment became final and conclusive on February 23, 2011 after being sentenced to 4 months of imprisonment for fraud, etc. at the same court on February 23, 2011.

【Criminal Facts】

Defendant

A, as an actual operator of H (hereinafter “H”) in the third floor of Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, takes overall charge of the business of the said company and takes charge of consulting with the borrower. Defendant D takes charge of the role of attracting loan clients. Defendant C takes charge of executing funds as a management director of the said company and preparing a contract. Defendant B (name prior to the name of the company: I) takes charge of the duty of appropriately gathering the amount of deposits made by the aforementioned company as a director of the said company, and Defendant B (name prior to the name of the company) takes charge of the duty of appropriately gathering the amount of deposits made by the said company, and the Defendants agreed to collect money as a franchisee even though they did not have the ability to provide the necessary security for the loan.

On August 7, 2008, the Defendants said, through J, the victim K at the office of Yufin Round in Gwanak-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City (Seoul Special Metropolitan City), that “The Defendant changed the amount of KRW 20 million as the franchise cost to reduce the pollution level so that the Defendants may obtain a loan at H.”

However, since the defendants did not have the collateral necessary for the loan, they did not have the intent or ability to get the loan even if they receive the franchise fee from the victim.