In April 2016, the Defendant, at the office of “C,” where the Defendant is working for the Defendant in Asan-si, Asan-si, the Defendant: (a) “A” is an investor of the upper 1%; (b) is also related to investment in a university; and (c) is also related to the management of investment by other customers; and (b) provides the Defendant with a large profit by investing KRW 30 million in a futures option; and (b) is also guaranteed the principal.

“A false representation was made.”

However, the defendant did not have any experience in investment in futures options, etc. from 2001 to 2002, about KRW 30 million, about KRW 50 million per time from 2009 to KRW 15,000 per year, and 10,000 to KRW 2 million per time from 2009. There was no experience in investment in the field related to investment in universities, colleges, etc., and there was no experience in managing investment from others, and even if the defendant did not receive an investment from others, there was no intention or ability to pay profits to the victim or return the principal later by investing in futures options, etc. even if he received an investment from the damaged person.

Around May 1, 2016, the defendant deceivings the victim as above and was delivered 30 million won to the three (F) treatment account in the future under the name of the defendant's spouse, the defendant's spouse.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes for the certificate of transfer confirmation;

1. In light of the relevant legal provisions on criminal facts, Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act regarding the selection of punishment, the defendant's reason for sentencing of punishment of imprisonment, the confession and reflects of the crime of this case, the defendant has no record of the same criminal act, the quality of the crime is not somewhat less, the damage recovery was almost not possible except for the crime of this case, 2.5 million won, and the victim did not reach an agreement with the victim, and all other circumstances revealed in the records of this case and the theory of the change of punishment as ordered.