② On May 26, 2015, the Defendant knew that the act of receiving similar goods ought to be performed after being detained by I on May 26, 2015, and there was no illegality recognition on the date and time indicated in the facts charged.

Therefore, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and misunderstanding the legal principles.

2. The Defendant asserted that the grounds for appeal in this case were the same in the lower court. The lower court held that: (i) the president, etc. of the FFFFF, etc., did not obtain authorization and permission under the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes; (ii) did an act of raising funds from many unspecified persons by entering into a contract with multiple agencies, including Seoul head office, to guarantee the payment of the principal amount exceeding the investment principal; and (iii) paid a sales commission (5-100 million won) and class allowances (2.5 billion won per month) to investors by guiding, explaining, and soliciting investment in the company’s entrustment professional composition; and (iv) the Defendant did not receive sales commission (5-100 million won per month) and class allowances (2.5 million won per month) from investors by selling sports equipment to investors; and (v) paid the principal amount exceeding 12-50% of the sales proceeds to investors by leasing it to agents, etc.; and (v) in light of the fact that the Defendant did not secure the sales proceeds of goods by the Plaintiff, etc.