Defendant

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

However, this judgment is delivered against Defendant B.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendants conspired to borrow money from others by providing the land of the west-gun F Party F purchased in the name of Defendant B in the de facto marriage E.

On October 208, the Defendants stated that the tea house in the vicinity of the Park Jong-gun, Seocheon-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun's Myun Park Jong-gun's Myun, the Defendant introduced the Defendant B, the wife of E, while the Defendant introduced the Victim G, the Defendant B, the wife of E, to the victim, and then borrowed money to be used for the memorial services in China. The Defendant B want to give the victim a condition without any condition.

In order to change the form and quality of a house, KRW 150 million is to live the land under the husband's name, and it is not known about the land in which the right to collateral security is established on the land, and it is to lend money to A.

On November 3, 198, Defendant A made a false statement to “A” and Defendant A sent a copy of the register of the land above the land in Seocheon-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do, the Republic of Korea, where the said land and any mortgage are not established to the victim, and made a false statement to “A lease KRW 50 million.”

However, the market price at the time of the above land was approximately KRW 50 million and KRW 35 million was 50,000 and KRW 35,000,000 was loaned from the Agricultural Cooperative of Seocheon-gu upon purchase of the above land by E, and it was established first priority mortgage on the above land as of November 3, 2008, and thus it is insufficient to secure KRW 50,000,000 that the above land was borrowed from the damaged party. Defendant A did not have any relationship with E, the owner of the land. Defendant A did not use the money borrowed from the damaged party in China as a funeral service in China, but did not use the money borrowed from the injured party in China. Moreover, there was no intention or ability to complete payment even if there was no property under the name of the Defendants and there was no revenue from the victims.

As above, the Defendants deceiving the victim and belong to it.