If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

On April 10, 2012, the Defendant, through an online game “B” game hold on April 17:10, 2012, expressed an open hosting language that the Defendant sells an item to the public, which is 650,000 won of the cash market price.

As a result of purchasing this, access to B “B”, leading to the display of the sales notice of the item on the game item “B” at the brokerage transaction site, such as the game item.

After that, the victim C who tried to purchase the same item in the open hosting paper again, was approaching the victim C who tried to purchase the same item, and he applied the item sale to "I item be", so that he requested the victim to do so.

However, even though the Defendant did not intend to sell game items at all, the Defendant was in the form of “the third party fraud of the item transaction” as if he sold the item.

Accordingly, without knowing the above facts at all, the injured party deposited 620,000 won of the purchase price of an item into the virtual account, and then takes over the transaction approval server, and the Defendant received the item from the witness “B” as if he approved the purchase at the middle, and received the item from the witness “B with an exchange value equivalent to 620,000 won at the market price at the time of sale in cash.

Summary of Evidence

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. Application of the police statement protocol law to C

1. Article 347 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines, and the selection of fines;

1. Articles 70 and 69(2) of the former Criminal Act (Amended by Act No. 12575, May 14, 2014);

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