Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

In the event that the Defendants did not pay the above fine, the Defendants did not pay the fine.

Punishment of the crime

Defendants are those working for the mutual business start-up consulting company of “E” on the 3rd floor of the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D Building.

On October 19, 2011, the Defendants conspired with the victim F, who requested a small capital start-up business, to purchase the machinery of the KIKO (new financial complex) that is manufactured and sold inG, may bring the profits from the investment in small capital. The Defendants agreed to set up five parts of the machinery up until November 201, to change the installation cost of KRW 5,00,000, separate from the installation cost of KRW 75,350,000, which is to be paid to G.

However, in fact, the cost of installing the KIKO machinery was already included in KRW 75,350,000 for the above machinery, so there was no obligation for the victim to pay it.

Nevertheless, the Defendants deceiving the victim that they should pay the installation cost separately from the KIKO mechanical cost as above, and they received 5 million won from the victim in the name of installation cost, and acquired it by transfer from the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each legal statement of the witness H and I;

1. Statement made by a witness F in the third protocol of the trial;

1. Each police statement made to F and I;

1. A receipt, a detailed statement of banking transactions, a consulting service contract for business start-up, and an individual operator contract;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint;

1. Defendants of relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts: Articles 347 (1) and 30 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants to be detained in a workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. Defendants bearing litigation costs: Articles 186(1) and 187 of the Criminal Procedure Act’s assertion and defense counsel’s defense and their defense counsel are consistent. Defendants’ operation E agreed with G to receive consulting costs per unit of 1 million won each time the KIKO machine in this case is sold. Additional taxes are paid for the above consulting costs.