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

On October 24, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to 8 months of imprisonment and 2 years of suspended execution by the Seoul Eastern District Court for violating the Attorney-at-Law Act, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on March 26, 2014.

No one, other than an attorney-at-law, shall receive or promise to receive money, valuables, entertainment or other benefits from an investigation case being handled by an investigative agency, handle legal counseling services, preparation of legal documents or other legal services, or arrange such acts.

Nevertheless, even if the defendant is not a lawyer, on December 2010, the defendant provided legal counseling to E who is being investigated by an investigative agency due to fraud, etc. at the defendant's certified judicial scrivener office located in the first floor of the building in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and received 5 million won from F in terms of fees for handling legal affairs.

Summary of Evidence

1. A protocol concerning the police interrogation of the accused;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Statement of E;

1. Previous convictions in the judgment: Criminal records, a copy of the judgment of 2012 Highest 2680, a conet case search (Seoul Eastern District Court Decision 2012 Highest 2680), a copy of the judgment (Fridong District Court Decision 2013No1393), a copy of the judgment (Supreme Court Decision 2014Do2480) and the application of statutes;

1. Article 109 of the Attorney-at-Law Act applicable to facts constituting an offense and Article 109 subparagraph 1 (c) of the same Act;

Title : Selection of a fine

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

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

1. proviso of Article 116 of the Attorney-at-Law Act;

1. In full view of the grounds for the Defendant’s request for formal trial as stated in the written request for formal trial of each evidence prior to the conviction of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, it is reasonable to view the Defendant’s 5 million won, which the Defendant received from E, as the legal counsel fee for the investigation case, not for the legal affairs permitted by the Certified Judicial Scriveners Act, such as the filing of a written application, a written complaint, and a submission agency.

However, the Certified Judicial Scriveners Act.