When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

On February 11, 2018, the Defendant posted a false advertisement to the effect that he/she sells a lux 4 game machine on the Internet, which is not in the national website, and posted a false advertisement to the effect that he/she sells a lux 4 game machine, and then received 300,000 won as the price for the sale of the game machine from the Saemaul Treasury (D) account in the name of the same day, as if he/she sold a lux 300,000 won to the Defendant’s mobile phone, from that time until February 12, 2018, and received 1,770,000 won in total as the price for the sale of the game machine from the victims five times from that time until February 12, 2018.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of the respective laws and regulations to the statements of Category B, E, F, G, and H

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, respectively;

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

1. The provision of the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the same Act (an aggravated punishment for concurrent crimes prescribed in a crime of fraud against H, the largest penalty for concurrent crimes);

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is that, although the defendant satisfied all the victims of each crime of fraud as indicated in the judgment of the court below, if considering the fact that the defendant committed a crime of fraud more than 20 times, even though he was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months in 2013 and 2 years in suspended execution, it is necessary to impose a punishment that may produce a minimum amount of force to prevent the defendant from repeating a crime, and therefore, the punishment is prescribed as above.