If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

On February 20, 2013, the defendant made a false statement that "it is necessary to make a settlement in order to obtain free experience of Internet lectures to the victim within the "Eac shop operated by the victim D in Gwangju North-gu, Gwangju."

On February 22, 2013, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim; (b) by deceiving the victim, paid the credit card amount of KRW 2,048,00 on three-month basis from the victim of Gwangju bank; and (c) on February 22, 2013, the Defendant acquired the victim by means of settling the sum of KRW 5,120,000 by settling the credit card amount of KRW 3,072,00 from the victim to the 12-month amount.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of each card use specification;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of punishment;

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

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserts to the effect that there is no intention to acquire the Internet lectures, such as having intention or ability to provide the Internet lectures.

In light of the fact that the victim entered into a contract and used the Internet lecture five times for 14 days, it is recognized that the defendant provided an explanation by emphasizing only the free experience part of the Internet lecture without properly explaining when he supposes the credit card from the victim, the defendant did not perform it by promising the Gwangju Credit Card to cancel the card while suppressions the card, and the defendant was economically difficult at that time, and the defendant was unable to respond to the victim's demand for withdrawal of the contract and eventually led time, the contact was cut down. Therefore, the defendant's and the defense counsel's above assertion is accepted.