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

The defendant is a person who operates a lending company (registration number: G) with the trade name "F Co., Ltd." in Suwon-si E and 301.

The Defendant decided to conduct a business of collecting claims against multiple debtors through an electronic payment order application, etc. on November 22, 201, after having taken over claims against H et al. from Korea Scke Capital Co., Ltd. around November 22, 2011. On March 6, 2012, the Defendant applied for an electronic payment order with the purport that the obligee would pay KRW 9,49,065 to F Co., Ltd. the obligor as H with the obligor as F Co., Ltd. by accessing the electronic payment order system at the above FF office and paying damages for delay on 122 occasions from that time to October 1, 2014, as indicated in the attached Table of Crimes. < Amended by Act No. 11358, Mar. 6, 2012>

Accordingly, the defendant acquired another person's right or pretended to acquire another person's right, thereby exercising his right by means of lawsuit, etc.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A written confirmation, a written contract for asset transfer or takeover, and a payment order;

1. Loan business registration certificate, business registration certificate, and corporate registry;

1. A list of confirmation of each takeover claim and of requests for payment order;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to list the collected amount after litigation and payment order, list of recovered amount through litigation procedures, and certificate of confirmation of deposit for purchase of bonds;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense and subparagraph 1 of Article 112 of the Act (in all cases, referring to the selection of fines) by an attorney at the option of punishment;

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

1. Determination on the assertion by the Defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The summary of the argument is that the defendant applied for electronic payment order with the bonds that he/she acquired, but the defendant did not engage in the business of taking over another person's rights and exercising his/her rights by means of litigation, etc.