The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of five million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The decision of the court below that found the defendant not guilty, even though the defendant did not have the intention or ability to operate a amusement room with the investment money of the victimized person or to lend the investment money with the gambling fund, by deceiving the injured person and receiving the money, is erroneous in the misconception of facts.

2. The facts charged in this case

A. On December 10, 2012, the Defendant would pay 500,000 won a monthly revenue to the victim even if the Defendant had not been able or able to operate a entertainment room even if the Defendant was unable to receive money from the victims who became aware of while working as an employee of the adult entertainment room in the past at the shopping coffee shop near the lower party’s river basin at the time of propagation on December 10, 2012.

“Along on the 12th 16:00 of the same month from the injured party, he/she received KRW 10 million from the Agricultural Cooperative Account (Account Number D) in the name of the accused from the injured party and acquired it by fraud.

B. On December 20, 2012, the Defendant: (a) around 18:00 on December 20, 2012, the Defendant did not plan to lend money from the injured party in the mutual French coffee shop located in Gwangju-gu to the persons gambling in the gambling place; and (b) did not have any intent or ability to repay the money, the Defendant would pay interest to the victim if he/she made an investment.

“Along on the 24th day of the same month from the injured party, I acquired a total of KRW 6 million from the injured party to the Agricultural Cooperative Account (Account Number D) in the name of the accused, and acquired it by fraud.

3. As to the determination of the lower court, the lower court attempted to operate a entertainment room with F or the Defendant, knowing the circumstances of investment.

The defendant did not have any intention or ability to operate a amusement room because there was no investigation into the alleged G and H.

It is insufficient to recognize the defendant's entry and withdrawal transactions, and even if there is a record of the entry and withdrawal which can be seen as a loan of the Internet gambling fund, the above deposit and withdrawal person.