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

On March 3, 2012, from around 23:00 to 02:40 of the same day, the Defendant ordered the victim C to pay the alcohol value to the victim from the “Dju shop” where the victim C works as an employee, as if he would pay the alcohol value to the victim.

However, the defendant had no intention or ability to pay the drinking value from the beginning.

As above, the Defendant received property benefits from the victim who believed the victim to be true, i.e., female helper services equivalent to KRW 225,000, from the seat, and received 680,000 from the victim, and 3 Scarblus Co., Ltd., 10,000, and 5 Scarblus Co., Ltd.

Summary of Evidence

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. C’s written statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing alcoholic beverage value receipts;

1. Relevant Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;