The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the prosecutor’s summary of the grounds for appeal can be sufficiently found guilty of the facts charged. Thus, the judgment of the first instance that acquitted the defendant is erroneous and misapprehension of the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting

2. Determination:

(a) A person who intends to run an international marriage brokerage business shall register with the head of the competent Si/Gun/Gu in accordance with the relevant statutes;

Nevertheless, on January 5, 2012, the Defendant posted a notice to the effect that he/she arranged international marriage on the Internet (C) website following the Internet (C), and provided counseling on D and international marriage (hereinafter “C”). On February 5, 2012, the Defendant would arrange international marriage with Vietnam on the condition that he/she would receive the said D and 8.9 million won in total at the Defendant’s residence located in Gung-gu, Young-gu, Gung-si.

“Concluding an international marriage brokerage contract with the content of the same month.”

7. Around February 14, 2012, the said D left Vietnam with approximately 30 bits of bits of bits of bits of bits of impree women in Vietnam at a impreecing hotel located in Vietnam with the said D’s departure from the Republic of Korea, and carried out international marriage brokerage business by arranging the contact with the Vietnam’s F, and undergoing the marriage procedure in accordance with the aforementioned method.

B. The summary of the judgment of the first instance court 1) A police statement was made as direct evidence that corresponds to the facts charged, but D was present at the court of first instance as a witness and made a false statement at the investigative agency.

By revealing that the defendant's wife G (the Vietnames, was naturalization after the marriage with the defendant) was able to pay the flight fee of G instead of the flight fee of G, and there was no money paid separately to the defendant as a marriage intermediary, and the police statement reversed the police statement to the effect that the defendant was married to Vietnam women by introducing the brokerage fee after paying it to the marriage broker in Vietnam.

2) Court-oriented principle and trial-oriented principle.