Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Criminal facts

【Defendant A, on November 19, 2015, was sentenced to imprisonment for a violation of the Act on the Regulation of Fraud and Similar Receiving Act at the Changwon District Court on November 19, 2015, and such judgment became final and conclusive on January 15, 2016.

【Criminal facts】 On November 28, 2013, the Defendants: (a) entered the mutual infinite coffee shop in Busan Dong-gu, Busan; and (b) Defendant A entered the name of “J” after the victim F.

The government supplies rice to the public as the central book business so that citizens can drink 20 prox (6 trillion won market size) by 2014.

Therefore, since FTAs are concluded and the government has limitations in supporting farmers, if farmers who cultivate general rice become aware of the problem in Korea, the problem could occur in Korea and the H dissemination could not be disclosed to the public, thereby making it confidential in the agricultural industry.

Since the Republic of Korea delegated the authority to conclude H’s overall sales contract by the Central Association of Nonghyup, the facts charged against the money for H’s overall sales contract using the expression “the money for a national total sales contract” as “the money for H’s overall sales contract.” According to the evidence of the judgment below, it is clear that the Defendants are the concept of defraudation, as the condition to give the victim F with the overall sales right, “the money that the Defendants requested to the victim with the rice value while the Defendants dead rice.”

However, there is a misunderstanding of the meaning of “deposit”, and thus, it is corrected as “money for the contract with HN Total Sales Rights”.

From the point of view of the victim’s use of the term “deposit” in the context of legal judgment, and based on the fact that the investigation was conducted, and that there was an explanation on this part in the examination procedure for the victim’s witness examination, such determination does not cause disadvantages to the Defendants’ exercise of their defense rights.