1. Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 2,000,000 won;

2. If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50.1 day.

Punishment of the crime

1. On October 5, 2010, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim D on October 5, 2010, that “The 13 members of the fraternity operated by the party” under Article 311 of the Seocho-gu Seoul Seocho-gu Seoul Building C, “The Defendant wishes to subscribe to the 1 million won successful bid for each share of KRW 1 million after the receipt of the fraternity. The Defendant will continue to pay the monthly payment, which would cause the Defendant to receive the monthly payment No. 4 of the No. 311.”

However, in fact, the defendant did not have any property and income at the time of joining the successful bid system operated by the victim, and there was a situation where the credit card price and the debt incurred by bonds have been at least KRW 100 million, and thus there was no intention or ability to continue to pay the deposit even if the victim joined the successful bid system and received the deposit.

On October 26, 2012, the Defendant received 6.8 million won from the victim as a guidance money and acquired it by fraud.

2. On October 22, 2010, the Defendant received KRW 8 million from the victim on November 12, 2010 under the pretext of the guidance, and acquired it by deception.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the witness D in this Court;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. A copy of each receipt for payment;

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the copies of books;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense. Article 347 (1) of the said Act;

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

1. In the case of a successful bidder on October 5, 2010, the Defendant paid the advance payment for four times even after receipt of the advance payment in the case of a successful bidder on October 5, 2010 under Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act, and the fact that the advance payment was made three times even after receipt of the advance payment in the case of a successful bidder on October 22, 2010, the punishment as set forth in Article 51 of the Criminal Act shall be determined by taking into account the sentencing conditions set forth in Article 51 of the Criminal Act as much as possible.

The defendant's assertion in this case is judged.