Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, as to the defendants, the two-year period from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendants are high-speed automobile dealers.

On May 25, 2013, the Defendants made a false statement that “the victim F (the age of 38) is a non-accidentd vehicle, and the use of the Rayter’s display of the Rayter’s display of the performance inspection record is a non-accidentd vehicle due to a collision that occurs over the speed limit limit.”

However, in fact, the above GV was a vehicle involved in the accident that occurred the repair cost of KRW 41,926,480 around December 25, 2012, and the Defendants were aware of such fact.

The Defendants received KRW 51,00,000 from the victim as the purchase price for the said vehicle.

Accordingly, the Defendants acquired the property by deceiving the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each legal statement of witness F and H;

1. F statement in the police interrogation protocol against the Defendants

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to documents, opinions, etc. to be submitted by complainants, records of inspection of the performance of used cars, records of information on the history of serious accidents in carpeta, meetings for investigation cooperation, certificates of deposit, certificates of deposit, reports on investigation (attached details of transactions in the I account);

1. Relevant legal provisions and the Defendants’ choice of punishment concerning criminal facts: each of the Defendants’ Articles 347(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act and the choice of imprisonment

1. Defendants who hold a suspended sentence: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances are considered among the reasons for sentencing);

1. The defendants of the community service order: Determination of the defendants and their defense counsel's assertion under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Code

1. The Defendants and the defense counsel asserted that there was no fact of deceiving the victim since the Defendants informed the victim of the fact-finding that there was an insurance policy that included the repair cost of KRW 40 million in relation to the motor vehicles stated in the facts of the crime (hereinafter “the instant motor vehicle”).

2. Examination of the judgment, which is legitimate in this Court.