A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Criminal facts

No one shall engage in financial investment business without authorization for a financial investment business.

However, the Defendant did not obtain an authorization for a financial investment business, and, on October 18, 2010, purchased 'F' shares, which were 11,000,000 won in the name of capital investment for over-the-counter shares, through E through employees D around October 18, 2010, and sold 'F' shares to E. In addition, the Defendant purchased shares recommended by investors from around that time to February 2012 for the purpose of investment for over-the-counter shares and received money as a cash for the purpose of investment for over-the-counter shares, and operated a financial investment business by allowing approximately 60-70 employees of the company (one 'FC') to trade over-the-counter shares.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness E and D;

1. Increase of stock custody, written agreement, proof of contents, and complete certificate of registered matters (Evidence No. 2-5);

1. Application of the Act and subordinate statutes to verify the account of the complainant, and to inquire about the transaction of beneficiary certificates (Evidence List 8,9);

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal Facts and the Selection of Punishment: Articles 444 subparagraph 1 and 11 of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act (integrated, the selection of imprisonment with prison labor);

1. Suspension of execution: Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Order of community service: Determination on the assertion by the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act

1. The gist of the assertion is that the Defendant only traded over-the-counter stocks in an individual manner and has not run a financial investment business.

2. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, “C” corporation operated by the Defendant was with a total of 60 to 70 employees soliciting investors in over-the-counter shares. This employee received subscription fees when recruiting investors in over-the-counter shares selected by the Defendant, and the Defendant provided education on over-the-counter shares selected by the employee.

The defendant's business that can be identified by this fact.