beta
Text
Defendant
A Imprisonment with prison labor for two years, for one year and six months, for Defendant C, for one year, and for Defendant D.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
[criminal record] Defendant A appealed on December 21, 2016 after being sentenced to two years and eight months of imprisonment for fraud, etc. at the Seoul Central District Court on July 19, 2017, which was sentenced to two years and four months of imprisonment for fraud, etc. at the Seoul Central District Court on July 19, 2017, but the appeal was dismissed on October 31, 2017, and the said appellate judgment became final and conclusive.
[Common Facts] Defendant A, in the building Fho-gu Building Fho-gu, in Daegu-gu, took each of the “G,” etc., and “I” and “J agency K” in Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu.
Defendant
B is the friendship of Defendant A, and Defendant C was an employee of Defendant B and C from January 2015, with the direction of Defendant A from around January 2015, in charge of the mobile phone purchase work of customers and the exchange of small amount using a mobile phone and mobile merchandise coupon.
Defendant
D From January 2016, the K branch of J agency has been in charge of the new mobile phone opening service, and the new mobile phone opening service has been provided to Defendant A.
IMFI is an international mobile device identification number used for the purpose of the maintenance and management of a mobile phone, such as opening of a mobile phone or registering theft or loss of a mobile phone, and the domestic telecommunications company can open multiple mobile phones with only one mobile phone allocated by IMO and can open one mobile phone in the domestic telecommunications company.
One Part L(State) pays to the agency approximately KRW 100,00 won and approximately KRW 100,000 for each mobile phone on condition of maintaining six months at the opening of a mobile phone, and the agency pays again the prescribed amount of incentives to subordinate sales stores, and the other communications agencies also maintain the communications policies as above, although there are differences between the requirements for and the degree of payment of incentives, etc.
The Defendants abuse the following facts: (a) the Defendants are in charge of managing the opening of cell phones only through the MFI, and accordingly, receive incentives, etc.; and (b) the aforementioned “G” is operated.