1. Defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the above sentence shall be executed for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Criminal facts

1. The Defendants’ joint crime committed on October 18, 2016, connected to the Defendants’ residential premises located in Yangsan City C by using their mobile phones, and sold opphone 6 on the bulletin board of the place.

The phrase “to send a smartphone on the face of 240,000 won” was written to the victim D (22) who reported and requested purchase. The phrase “to send a smartphone on the face of 240,000 won.”

However, in fact, the Defendants did not have smartphones to sell to the victims, and all sales proceeds received from the victims are planned to be used as living expenses, etc., so they did not have intention or ability to sell smartphones from the beginning.

Ultimately, the Defendants: (a) by deceiving the victim as above; (b) received KRW 240,00 from the victim to the Agricultural Cooperative account in Defendant B’s name on the same day; and (c) received the total amount of KRW 1,077,000 from that time in the same manner as “the list of crimes” in the attached Table from November 4, 2016 until November 4, 2016.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to induce victims and acquired the property by receiving the property.

2. Defendant B’s sole crime committed on November 18, 2016: (a) visited the Internet NAV E Caf page using his mobile phone at the place indicated in paragraph (1) at around November 18, 2016; and (b) sold Aphone 6 on the bulletin board of the place.

The phrase “to send a smartphone on the face of the week” was written to the victim F (330,000 won) who reported the above writing and requested purchase. The phrase “to send a smartphone on the face of the week” was written to the victim F (27 years).

However, in fact, the Defendant did not have smartphones sold to the victim, and all sales proceeds received from the victim are planned to be used as living expenses, etc., so the victim did not have intention or ability to sell smartphones from the beginning.

Ultimately, the Defendant is the victim as above.