Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. From June 10, 2018 to June 17, 2018, the Defendant: (a) at the D convenience store operated by the victim C in Jung-gu Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul, the Defendant: (b) made a false statement to his/her employees on the following grounds: (c) the Defendant: (a) made a false statement to the employees: (d) made a short-term telephone call call; and (b) made the victim use of the b1,521 information service, on which he/she is charged with the information fee; and (b) made the victim use of the b11,521 information service, on which he/she is charged with the information fee; and (c) obtained the equivalent pecuniary benefit.

2. On July 6, 2018, the Defendant, at around 13:00, obtained economic benefits equivalent to the same amount by making the victim use of the f9,245 won information service, using the f9,245 won flat counseling service, on the G convenience store operated by the victim F of the apartment building in Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, the Defendant made a false statement to H, an employee, “I would allow him/her to use the flat phone because there is any money that he/she would have to have now been flated, and that he/she would not have any flated from the cell phone, and there is any money that he/she would have to receive, but would not have to receive, a sudden call.”

Summary of Evidence

1. A protocol concerning the interrogation of each police suspect against the accused;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the F and C of each police statement protocol, including the details of wire calls, sales slips, telephone charges notice, and receipt investigation report (suspect specific) investigation report (suspect specific).

1. Relevant Article 347 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting a crime and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Although there are favorable circumstances such as the absence of the record of the same kind of crime on the grounds of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the amount of damage is a relatively small amount, on the other hand, the method and frequency of each of the crimes in this case.