Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

2. In light of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant had the same history of judgment; and (b) the instant crime was committed within the repeated crime period due to the previous conviction of the same type of punishment; (c) the Defendant’s good sentencing factor; (d) the criminal intent of deception or deception was not much weighted; (e) the amount acquired by deception was actually used as the expenses of the company’s benefits and operating expenses; (b) the Defendant paid KRW 10,200,000,000 to the Defendant before the original judgment was rendered; (c) the Defendant continued to endeavor to recover damage; and (d) agreed with the victim, the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, background and consequence of the instant crime; and (e) all other circumstances that form the conditions of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments, such as the circumstances after the commission of the crime, are unreasonable.

3. According to the conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is well-grounded, and the following is ruled again after pleading.

[Re-written judgment] The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by the court is identical to the description of each corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 347 of the choice of punishment;

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

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