Defendants shall be punished by a fine of five million won.

The Defendants did not pay each of the above fines.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

B On September 12, 2014, the Suwon District Court was sentenced to four months of imprisonment for a crime of fraud in the Sungnam branch of the Suwon District Court on September 20, 2014, and its judgment became final and conclusive on September 20, 2014. On January 17, 2014, the same court was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment for a crime of fraud, etc. and became final and conclusive on January 25, 2014.

Defendants are contractors who receive advertising and interior works in connection with profit-making type cooking sales projects implemented by D and F in Pyeongtaek-gun E in South-si, Namyang-si, the land owned by D, etc.

On the other hand, on February 28, 201, the Bupyeong-gu Saemaul Savings Depository and the Do Agricultural Community Community Depository respectively set up a collateral security right with a sum of KRW 3,80,000,000 for the debtor I and the maximum debt amount with respect to the buildings, such as the building site and the first floor of the second floor, the E site, and the H site and the ground operation, etc., in the Nam-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, which are owned by D and G.

On November 1, 2012, the Defendants filed a lien report stating the amount of claims secured on the construction cost claim as KRW 1 billion in the situation where the Bupyeong-gu Saemaul Savings Depository and the Do Agricultural Saemaul Savings Depository, which did not receive repayment of the said obligation, applied for voluntary auction on October 10, 2012, the Defendants filed a lien report with respect to the operation of building Nos. 102, 103, and 106 and H ground building Nos. 103, 106 and H ground building Nos. 102, 103, and 106 in the Nam-gun-si, Nam-dong.

However, in fact, there was no construction work for building Nos. 102, 103, and 106 of the ground building E in Pyeongtaek-gun, Namyang-si, and the actual cost of construction is limited to KRW 70 million.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to report the false lien and reduced the bid price equivalent to the amount of the secured debt so that the auction can be conducted more than four times in total, thereby doing so in a fraudulent way, thereby doing so.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each police statement to J and K;

1. Report on the right of retention and search of auction cases;

1. Previouss before judgment: Defendant B’s legal statement, criminal history records, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes of judgment;

1. Relevant Articles of the Act concerning the facts constituting the crime;