A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

The defendant shall pay 93,594,907 won to the applicant for compensation by deceit.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who operates a package gambling manufacturer with the trade name of “E”.

On April 18, 2013, the Defendant concluded a contract on the supply of goods to be paid by the end of the following month after the closing of the tax invoice, with the victim D Co., Ltd. (Representative G) at the above E office located in Gwangju-si.

However, in fact, while the Defendant was supplied with the Alley branch from the Seoul metropolitan area at the time, the original transaction was suspended due to the failure to pay approximately KRW 50 million of the price for the goods. In addition, there was a lot of liability such as the transaction partner's obligation and bonds, and there was no intention or ability to pay the price properly even if the Defendant received the original unit from the victim because he did not own any property.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, as above, by deceiving the victim and being supplied with the original team equivalent to KRW 39,192 at the market price around September 26, 2014 by the victim, etc., the Defendant, from around that time to January 30, 2015, failed to receive the original team equivalent to KRW 93,594,907 in total over 55 times, as shown in the crime list, and acquired the money by deception.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's partial statement in court (the third trial date);

1. Legal statement of the witness H;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by the prosecution (including H substitute interrogation);

1. When a goods supply contract, customer director, and electronic tax invoice Defendant had the ability to pay the credit amount to the Seoul market, thereby approaching the victim, who is a competitor, who was unable to be supplied with the goods, and began credit transaction with the victim, while continuing credit transaction with the victim and continued credit transaction with the victim, they were unable to be supplied with the goods any longer, they again continue to be supplied with the goods while engaging in cash transaction with I, a new competitor, while engaging in the business.