2. Around September 26, 2014, the Defendant entered into an agreement with D to hold G Contact from November 15, 2014 to H, at a restaurant located in 110, Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City C 110.

Many sponsories have been secured, and the hosts are Chinese people, and they are publicitying in China.

If you invest KRW 20 million, it will guarantee not only the principal but also the return on investment of KRW 50 million.

If this is followed, it is false that the penalty for each period calculated by adding the interest rate of 25% per annum should be paid.

However, the Defendant had no particular property owned by the Defendant at the time, while there was a debt equivalent to KRW 175 million, and the Defendant Company I had a debt equivalent to KRW 730,000,000,000 operated by the Defendant, and the Defendant was a company planning the above contact for the first time, and thus there was no sales, and the Defendant failed to prepare the production cost for the above contact. In addition, the Defendant did not obtain any approval for the use of the name of “K” and the location of the space where the contact is held and the name of “K,” and did not enter into any contract with H as well as for the use of the name of “K” from the H time, which was a situation in which the public relations activities in China were not conducted at all. Accordingly, even if having received the investment money from D, there was no intent or ability to return the principal of the investment or to pay the penalty therefor.

Accordingly, the Defendant, as above, by deceiving D, received from D, a transfer of KRW 20 million from D to a bank account under the name of J, a corporation around September 28, 2014.

3. The lower court’s judgment: (a) the evidence alone submitted by the prosecutor alone that the Defendant deceivings D.

It is not sufficient to recognize the recognition.

On the other hand, the defendant was acquitted.

4. The original judgment and the first instance judgment shall be adopted.