Seized evidence1 to 4 above shall be confiscated from the accused.

When the Defendant came to know of the fact that he had been working as an employee from August 201 to March 2012, 201, the Defendant was able to easily punish money with a single-name “scambling” method (the commission of committing a crime by communicating to a commercial sex business establishment, such as a massage terminal, etc. to report illegal sexual traffic). As such, he was able to bring money into money by communicating to an unspecified number of nationwide and unspecified massage clinic that he came to know through the Internet site, etc.

At around 21:44, May 2, 2012, the Defendant phoneed to Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D and did not provide money to E who is a business manager, the Defendant took over 200,000 won from the victim drinking, using the agricultural bank account in the name of F, from which he reported his commercial sex business. From around that time to September 26, 2012, the Defendant collected a total of 21,80,000 won by the same method over 97 times in total, as shown in the attached list of crimes, from around that time to September 26, 2012.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. Each police statement made to H, I, and J;

1. Each statement of E, K, L, M, N,O, P and Q;

1. Details of the account deposited by the victim H, each response sheet, each investigation report, receipt and notification of a request for financial transaction information, details of the account, records of seizure, records prepared by a suspect A in writing on his/her own account in the course of committing a crime, records used for each crime, R, S or F or I account details, records prepared by a suspect A at the time of committing a crime, response sheet by a financial institution, and seized articles;

1. Application of statutes to inquiries about criminal records, etc.;

1. Article 350 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and the proviso of Article 50 and Article 42 of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 48(1) of the Criminal Act of confiscation is that the defendant has no criminal record of a stay of execution or more, and the defendant has a depth of his mistake.