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

The Defendant, who came to know through his denial, stated that “A business is engaged in the sales of a heavy difference at an auction, making profits significantly difficult, and making every month in the event of an investment,” and that there was a fact that B received an investment from B from around 2009 and returned the principal and profits.

B invested the first five million won to the Defendant, which led to a continuous increase in the amount of principal and earnings after which all were returned. From July 2012, B00 to its employees, the Defendant made an investment to the Defendant through B from July 2012, 200 to November 2013, by explaining the business contents of the Defendant, “it is so difficult to compare with the bank because it has made an investment in automobile auction, and it is possible to make a high profit in a short period.” Accordingly, six employees of B made an investment to the Defendant through B from July 2012 to November 2013.

After the victim C became aware of the defendant's business through workplace B, it was also 23 million won as principal and profit around September 2013 after investing 20 million won in the defendant around March 2013.

However, in fact, from around 2007, the Defendant took over the vehicle installmentsd from the capital company in arrears to sell the vehicle at a middle speed. Since around 2010, even if investment was made due to a big difficulty in business, it was difficult to pay the principal and the profits properly, and since around 2012, it was so-called so-called, such as receiving new investment money and paying part of the principal and the profits of the existing investment money received from B due to the failure to return it properly, even if the Defendant received the additional investment money from the victim through B, it is the principal.