The request of applicants for compensation shall be dismissed.

On October 27, 2015, the Defendant posted a notice on the purchase of Victim E (23 taxes, South) (hereinafter “E”) with access to the Internet evasion site and the national website around October 27, 2015, and concluded that the Defendant would send the said goods to the Defendant’s home-based dispatch if the Defendant sent the purchase price by contact the victim with Kakao Stockholm to the victim.

However, the defendant did not have the intention or ability to sell because he did not possess the above 9398 crawlss.

As above, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim; (b) received KRW 240,00 from the victim’s account (F) in the name of the Defendant; and (c) received from the victim KRW 5,405,00,000 from the victims over 15 times until December 19, 2015, as indicated in the list of crimes in attached Form 15.

On December 7, 2015, the Defendant sent a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant would deliver the money to the Defendant, if he/she remitted the money,” by communicating the money to the Defendant on the bulletin board of the country, at the G’s house located in Seocheon-si, Seocheon-si, Seocheon-si.” The Defendant sent a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant would deliver the money to the Defendant, if he/she remitted the money to the Defendant.”

However, the defendant did not own the crowdfunding that the victim wants, and even if he received money from the injured party, he thought that he will use it as the name of his living expenses or repayment of loans, etc., and did not have the intent or ability to deliver the crowdfunding to the injured party.

As above, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim; (b) received KRW 400,00 from the said victim to the Nong Bank account under the name of the Defendant; and (c) received the total amount of KRW 2,535,000 from the victim seven times in total, including the content of the attached crime list, from December 28, 2015 to December 28, 2015.

Accordingly, the defendant was informed of the victims to receive each property.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's person;