2. 50,000 won where the defendant does not pay the above fine.

When operating “B”, the Defendant: (a) purchased the punchine and then entrusted the processing of the punchine to the victim D who operates the “C” with a certain thickness; (b) sold the processed punchine to “E”, “F”, etc.; (c) when the Defendant was returned from the customer, such as the said “E, due to the original defect itself, etc. purchased by the Defendant; (d) was requested to the said customer and received a return certificate, etc. stating the reason for return differently from the fact, stating the reason for return, differently from the fact, and (e) filed a civil lawsuit against the Defendant claiming 8,315,400 won from the victim’s punch processing; and (e) was filed by the victim’s request for a return return from the said customer, etc., and (e) was exempted from paying the amount equivalent to the amount of return.

On August 24, 2012, the Defendant received each of the products equivalent to KRW 600,00 from “E” and KRW 1,654,400 from “F” due to the defect that occurred in the course of the victim’s punch processing, and submitted a reply and the return certificate, etc. to the effect that the amount of the victim’s claim should be deducted.

However, the reason for return in E and F was most caused by the defect in the punch group itself, and the above certificate of return was written differently from the fact.