Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

1. On August 25, 2017, the Defendant embezzled, at the time in the Seocho-gu Seoul Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, one mobile phone owned by the victim D (34 tax) at the event held before the Seocho-gu Seoul Seocho-gu, without following necessary procedures, such as returning to the victim, even though he/she found one cell phone owned by the victim D (34 tax), and embezzled the property that he/she had, as he/she would have, left, left the possession of the victim.

2. From August 26, 2017, at around 10:20 on August 26, 2017, the Defendant: (a) stolen a monitic mong monbing wall in the market price, accompanied by a credit card, etc. owned by a single bank owned by the victim G (30).

3. Violation of Acts in financial business specializing in fraud and credit;

A. From August 26, 2017, around 10:30 on August 26, 2017, at the Gangnam-gu Seoul E Commercial Building E-H Miscellaneous store, it presented a stolen credit card as if the victim was a legitimate holder, as described in paragraph 2, and purchased one verification room equivalent to KRW 10,000,000, and deceiving the victim by signing on the pre-sale slip.

Accordingly, the defendant, by deceiving the victim, acquired property benefits equivalent to 10,000 won and used the credit card.

B. On August 26, 2017, around 10:42, at the above E'I's clothing store, the victim J (66 years of age) proposed that the victim J (66) was a legitimate holder, as described in paragraph 2, that the stolen credit card was purchased as one of the verification marks equivalent to KRW 5,500, and had the victim enticed the victim by signing on the sales slip.

Accordingly, the Defendant acquired property benefits equivalent to KRW 5,500 and used the credit card.

(c)

On August 26, 2017, around 10:54, 2017, at the above E'K's clothing store, it presented to the victim L(27 tax) as if the victim was a legitimate holder, as described in paragraph 2, and instead, purchased 80,000 won of 80,000 won of crate, and deceiving the victim by signing on the sales slip.

In this respect, the defendant acquired and deprivedly 80,000 won property benefits.