The punishment of the accused shall be determined by four months of imprisonment.

Punishment of the crime

On October 25, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a crime of fraud in the leisure support of Suwon Friwon, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on January 6, 2014.

On August 8, 2009, the Defendant, at a coffee specialty where it is impossible to know the trade name in the Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju, the Defendant reported that “The Government grants a casino machine license to the third-class hotel” to the victim E.

The casino machines obtained permission to install the casino machines, and made a false statement to make an investment in money, because it would make a total of the rights of Honam within one year.

However, the fact was that it was impossible to obtain permission for the production of a speculative game because it was not prepared to obtain permission for the production of a speculative game, and the defendant thought that the investment money was used for various living expenses, expenses, etc., so there was no intention or ability to obtain permission for the installation of the above speculative game machine from the victim.

Nevertheless, on September 7, 2009, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim; (b) received from the victim; (c) around September 7, 2009, KRW 15 million from the Defendant’s F’s account (Account Number G) managed by the Defendant; and (d) received the remittance of KRW 68,50 million in total over eight times from the above day to September 28, 2009 as indicated in the separate crime list.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of E and H;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the suspect against the accused by the prosecution;

1. Court rulings (59 pages of investigation records); and

1. It is difficult to believe that the defendant, who had been engaged in the entertainment-related industry for a considerable period of time, was aware of the fact that the production of the passbook details [the manufacture of the speculative game machine was not permitted since 1992, and it was impossible to believe that the defendant, who had been engaged in the entertainment-related industry, was the original copy of the I's oral statement and the permission for the manufacture of the speculative game machine was not granted, and that the victim did not obtain permission for the manufacture of the speculative game machine, the Gwangju-ju of the speculative game machine;