Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months, and each of the defendants B and C shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a year.

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal Justice] On October 28, 2010, Defendant A was released on June 30, 201 and the parole period expired on July 23, 201, while he/she was sentenced to six months of imprisonment for an injury at the Daejeon District Court on June 28, 201, and on April 5, 2013, Defendant A was sentenced to one year of imprisonment for a crime of fraud, etc. at the Seoul Central District Court and the judgment became final and conclusive on June 8, 2013.

Defendant

B On January 4, 2013, the Daejeon District Court sentenced two years and six months of imprisonment for fraud, etc. in public order branch of the Daejeon District Court on May 20, 2013, which became final and conclusive on May 20, 2013.

Defendant

C On January 8, 2009, the Daejeon District Court sentenced three months of imprisonment with prison labor for larceny, etc. and completed the execution of the sentence on March 26, 2009. On January 24, 2013, the Daejeon District Court sentenced two years of imprisonment with prison labor for fraud, etc. and became final and conclusive on May 24, 2013.

【Criminal Facts】

1. The Defendants’ co-principals agreed to commit the act of “scaming” with E and F, and E called “scamscams” by phone call to the victims, Defendant B’s role in searching for the money deposited by the victims, Defendant A and F’s role in driving the vehicle or viewing the network, and Defendant C conspired to seek a large passbook to be used for committing the crime.

At around 18:56 on February 28, 2012, the Defendants, along with E and F, called “E in front of the community credit cooperatives in Shin-dong, Sin-si, Gongyang-si, called “A police officer of the Namyang-gu Police Station.” The Defendants arrested the morale of the goods that were caused by the Internet shopping mall prior to the towing. To receive the amount of damages, the Defendants made a false statement with cash withdrawal.”

However, in fact, the defendants did not have the intention or ability to return the amount of damage to the victim because the defendants were aware of deceiving the victim of the money.

The Defendants, in collusion with E and F, deceiving the victims as above, received KRW 5,106,373 from the Defendant C’s mother account (Account Number I) in the name of H.