Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for eight months and by imprisonment for six months.

However, for one year from the date this judgment has become final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On November 2006, the Defendants of the 2013 Highest 115, 2016 reported that the victim D paid job offer advertisements to seek multiple employees from the former North Korean territory, and solicited the victim to receive advance payment from the victim by means of false speech that the victim would work as a multiple employee.

On November 5, 2006, at the same time, Defendant A made a false statement to the victim that “I will work as an employee in Eda, and as the bonds have previously been issued, I would first change 4 million won under the prepaid payment,” and Defendant B, which was next to it, would be a multi-party employee as A, to the victim “I would like to work as a multi-party employee as A. In the previous case, 3.2 million won is changed under the pre-paid payment.”

However, in fact, even if the Defendants received the advance payment from the victim due to a large number of bonds, they did not have the intent or ability to work as an employee from the above multilateral bank.

Nevertheless, on November 7, 2006, the Defendants deceiving the victim and received two million won in cash from the above Eda bank operated by the victim on November 7, 2006, and received two million won in total from the post office account under one’s name to the post office account under one’s own name and received two million won in advance. Defendant B received two million won in cash directly from the above Eda on November 7, 2006, and received two million won in advance from the above Eda on November 7, 2006. On November 10, 2006, the Defendants received five million won in cash from the said Eda bank account under one’s name.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to deception the victim and deception the victim about 7.2 million won in total.

"2013 Highest 261"

1. Defendants

A. On December 19, 2007, the Defendants made a false statement to the victim “I” in the “I” entertainment tavern operated by the victim G in the G in the G in the G in the G in the G in the G in the G in the G in the G in the G in the G in the G in the G in the U.S..

(b).