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

On February 19, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to four months of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Military Service Act in order to support the High Court of the Republic of Korea, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on September 27, 2016.

On April 9, 2015, the Defendant made a false statement to the DPC operated by C, located in the Mapo-gu Seoul Mapo-gu Seoul underground 1st floor, that “If you send money to the victim, you will send two PC lendings to the Defendant,” and “I will send money to the Defendant,” despite the lack of intention or ability to sell the goods.

Accordingly, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received 20,000 won from a new bank account in the name of C on the same day under the name of fluor lending money from the victim, and acquired it.

Summary of Evidence

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. E statements;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. A reply to a warrant of search, seizure, and verification;

1. Previous convictions: Criminal records, written judgments, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing inquiry into case agreements;

1. Relevant Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

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

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act for sentencing of the instant case is as follows: (a) although the amount of damage was small, but the Defendant had a history of having been punished several times for the same kind of crime; and (b) around June 2014, even though the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for eight months by means of fraud, such as fraud, with the intent to conceal money from victims by pretending the sale of goods through the Internet in a similar way, it is not good in that the Defendant again committed the instant crime under the same method.

In addition to these circumstances, the punishment is imposed as ordered in consideration of all the factors of sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior and environment.