However, the execution of imprisonment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

If the defendant loses money in online gambling while having access to the adult PC located in Dobong-gu and Gangnam-gu, Dobong-gu, etc., he/she would not operate his/her business by reporting illegal business such as money exchange to the police.

around 05:20 on April 27, 2016, the Defendant reported to the police illegal business, such as exchange, etc., of the victim who lost his/her money while exchanging his/her own cash into cyber money, from “EPC room” in the operation of the victim of the victim of the instant underground floor C of Dobong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and having lost his/her money from “ballto”, a gambling website.

“Intimidation,” but the victim refused to report 112, and the police officer who continued to be dispatched after receiving a report shall report later.

After the PC was returned as "," it was found in the PC room on the same day, and it continued to search for the victim and report it to the police unless it is known to the victim.

“Intimid intimidation, it received KRW 80,00 from a food victim, and received KRW 80,00 from the victim, and received KRW 620,00 from the victims over eight occasions, such as the list of crimes in the attached Table, and did not acquire or achieve the intent thereof.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of the statutes in which each police statement protocol against each victim is entered in the list of crimes;

1. Articles 350 (1) and 352 of the relevant Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Mitigation of attempted crimes under Article 25(2) and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (each of the crimes Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, and 7 in the list of crimes);

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. In light of the observation of protection and the social service order Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, it is not good for the reason of sentencing, and it did not lead the victims to an unafforcing intent to punish them. However, the victims were also at fault due to illegal business. However, the Defendant’s past history and this is the same.