A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal Power] On September 15, 2017, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with labor for a violation of the Game Industry Promotion Act at the Seoul Northern District Court, and the judgment became final and conclusive on February 9, 2018.

【Criminal Facts】

On August 2015, the Defendant stated that “C” offices located in Kangcheon-si, Gangwon-si, Gangwon-do, should purchase the victim D with “C if it is difficult to raise the Co., Ltd.,” and that “the Defendant would pay off the installment savings if he/she lends the funds to purchase the Dak at the end of the year, so he/she would pay off the installment savings.”

However, in fact, the Defendant did not intend to use the above money from the beginning, and the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay the money, even if he borrowed the money due to the fact that the property was attached to the bad credit holder at the time.

Around September 2, 2015, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received KRW 10 million from the victim to the F Association account (G) in the name of E in the name of borrowed money, and received KRW 50 million from around that time to November 26, 2015 in total four times, as described in the separate crime list, as described in the separate crime list.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness D;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to written complaints, investigative reports (Attachment of a written statement of the He/she for reference, telephone conversations between I company and J);

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 347 of the choice of punishment (generally, choice of imprisonment);

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

1. Judgment on the assertion by the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act

1. The summary of the Defendant’s assertion is not deceiving the victim, since he borrowed the money listed in [Attachment 1] and 2 from the list of crimes, and actually used to purchase Bak.

2. According to the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court, the Defendant is the victim.