Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for a period of two years and six months, and for a period of two years, respectively.

However, this judgment is delivered against Defendant B.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendants, who received money for investment consultation using real estate development information, etc., and received money for service expenses, etc. as “real estate investment hub”, was intended to receive money for the purpose of changing the purpose of use as a visiting planning zone where it is difficult to develop the land by designating 109,093 square meters of Do Do 109,093 square meters of E forest and land and 42,466 square meters of E forest and land (hereinafter “the instant forest”) as a marine national park zone in November 2009.

Defendant

A around November 2009, the victim F, who became aware of the introduction of a son in the non-disclaimed restaurant located in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, is designated as a maritime national park zone because the 109,093 square meters of land and the 42,466 square meters of land E-2,46 square meters of land in Gyeongnam-gu, Gyeongnam-do, is limited to the present, but the change of use can be made to the visiting planning zone at the time of coordinating the national park zone of the Ministry of Environment of this year.

In order to change the purpose of use, the facts charged should be paid to the National Park Management Corporation as a "design Service Company which performs a survey of a park area", and the service cost such as street funds and activity expenses can be changed by the main purpose of use.

The phrase “ makes a false statement.”

However, the fact that the forest of this case cannot be excluded from the national park zone because there was a high preservation necessity in the case of forest and so there was no possibility that the use of the forest of this case would be changed to the visiting planning zone at the time of 2009. Moreover, even if the design service company merely takes charge of surveying the boundaries and size of the national park, etc., and the Defendants did not have the authority to change the use of the forest of this case, even if the Defendants did not receive money from the damaged party, such as street funds, etc.,

The Defendants, on November 27, 2009, are KRW 145 million from the injured party under the pretext of street funds, etc. around November 27, 2009.