A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for four years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The indictment actually operated by the defendant on February 2, 2013 in the second floor of Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C building on February 2, 2013 is written by the defendant as the "representative director" of D, but the representative director in the corporate register is G.

However, in light of the facts and circumstances as examined in the determination of the argument of the defendant and his defense counsel, this part is revised to clarify the status of the defendant since it is reasonable to deem that the defendant actually operated D.

At the business office of D (hereinafter referred to as “D.”), the victim E and the victim F leased the 5th floor of H hotel in detail in the Philippines, and the establishment and operation of the 200 slot machine game machine, which has been permitted to do so, was anticipated to have a maximum of KRW 50 billion operating profit, and the expected profit per slot machine will be KRW 10 million per month. If the Party invests 15 million per unit of slot machine (one unit of slot machine), it would have paid KRW 20% of its investments every month as its profits, and separately thereafter, the Party made a false statement to the effect that the principal would be returned as it is.

However, at the time of fact, the Defendant was unable to conduct slot machine business due to the lack of the fact that the pertinent business was permitted by the competent authorities of the Philippines, and there was no specific plan for investors to expect enormous business profit as promised. Even if the victims received money from the victims as the source of investment in the game business, it was not possible to pay a certain portion of the money to the existing investors and victims as the profits accrued from the business. Therefore, there was no intention or ability to return the profits promised to the victims continuously or to return the principal.

As above, the defendant deceivings victims, and around February 14, 2013, from the victim F and E.