If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

From September 2010, the Defendant reported the communications sales business in Seongdong-gu Seoul apartment 201 Dong 902 and operated a specialized translation company with the trade name “D”.

Around May 2013, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant would pay the Korean translation fee to the victim G by completing a translation of the translation on the translation requested by customer F.”

However, the Defendant paid translation fees in the form of so-called “competence” as the obligation that had not been paid for translation from July 2012 was accumulated. Therefore, even if the Defendant requested translation to the victim, the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to pay translation fees.

The Defendant, as such, did not pay a translation fee of KRW 10,00 in total from May 2013 to July 2013, by deceiving the victim and receiving a translation completed by the victim, etc., but did not pay a translation fee of KRW 741,00 in total.

In addition, from around that time to June 2014, the Defendant did not pay the total amount of KRW 21,183,128 to eight victims as shown in the attached crime list, and acquired the same amount of pecuniary benefits.

Summary of Evidence

1. Court statement of the defendant (the second trial date);

1. The police statement of H;

1. Each complaint;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes at the end of the introduction of a company into the D website;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 347 (1) of the same Act concerning the applicable criminal facts, the selection of fines;

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

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

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order is the following: (a) the background and content of each of the instant crimes; (b) the degree of damage; and (c) the victims mentioned in the attached Table Nos. 2 through 4 were fully satisfied; and (d) the agreement with two of them was made.