The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

On September 18, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to 10 months of imprisonment with labor for a violation of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act at the Seoul Southern District Court (Seoul Southern District Court) and the judgment became final and conclusive on March 24, 2015. On January 20, 2016, the Seoul Southern District Court sentenced the Defendant to 3 years of suspended execution for 2 years of imprisonment with labor for fraud, and the judgment became final and conclusive on January 28, 2016.

On July 15, 2005, F Co., Ltd. was established for the purpose of manufacturing cosmetics, wholesale and retail business, etc., and changed its trade name to G with the lead of the defendant on April 23, 2012. The defendant was appointed as a director of G Co., Ltd. around April 23, 2012.

In fact, although the Defendant did not have graduated from the department of pharmacy at the Gyeonggi High School and the department of pharmacy at the Seoul University, graduated from the GJ Co., Ltd. as an exchange student or graduated from the department of pharmacy at the same college of pharmacy and pharmacy at the same college of pharmacy, and graduated from the department of pharmacy at the Gyeonggi High School and the department of pharmacy at the Seoul University of pharmacy at the same college of pharmacy as an exchange student, and led to the acquisition of the degree of clinical pharmacist and pharmacy doctor at the same college of pharmacy at the same college of pharmacy. On March 15, 2012, the name was changed to "K Co., Ltd." (hereinafter referred to as "victim Co., Ltd.") introduced through H representative I by the representative director I of H Co., Ltd. on March 29, 2013.

【False Fraud of Research Cost for the Development of New Materials】

On March 21, 2012, the Defendant, at the victim company office located in Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, made a false statement to L, “The representative director of the victim company, who is so accused, provided support of KRW 300 million as necessary to develop new materials using micro-organism technology,” stating, “The Defendant will give 60,000 shares of M& company held by the Defendant.”

However, in fact, the Defendant was not a micro-organism doctor, and there was no intention or ability to develop new materials using micro-organism technology, while M&A was unable to maintain its financial position at the time, and its annual sales are merely KRW 100,000 or KRW 200,000,000 per share and thus, there was little value as a stock.

On March 21, 2012, the Defendant deceptioned the victim company as above, and acquired 300 million won from the victim company to the national bank account in the name of the Defendant to the national bank account in the name of the Defendant, as a research expense for the development of new materials.

[Fraud for Prices of Supply, such as Micro-Organism cosmetics]

The Defendant, around March 21, 2012, delivered KRW 300 million as described in the preceding paragraph at the victim company's office located in Guro-gu Seoul, the Defendant concluded a contract with the victim company, including the fact that, in the process of delivering KRW 300 million as described in the preceding paragraph, the Defendant stated that “new technology and new products will be supplied to the victim company. It will actively cooperate and assist in the future pharmaceutical acquisition and overseas market sector in the Defendant's new technology and new products,” and that, on April 30, 2012, the Defendant directly made drinking and Posty Posty Posty Posty Posty Posty directly made the cosmetic. It was also made into a micro-organism, but it would supply this.” On April 24, 2012, the Defendant called “14 products, such as cosmetics, added a micro-organism,” and concluded an order with the victim company, NO, etc. around April 30, 2012.

However, the defendant is not a micro-organism doctor, and there was no intention or ability to add a micro-organism to the 14 kinds of products, such as cosmetics, and in particular, N supplied to the victim company was a prescription product manufactured with a micro-cung medication and spoke medication, not only the defendant has been developed but also did not add a micro-dial substance, and 0 degrees of 0 was not developed by the defendant.

As above, the Defendant deceptioned the victim company, and received KRW 66,00,000 from the victim company to the account under the name of G company G for the supply of cosmetics added to micro-organism, and acquired KRW 736,068,840 in total from around that time to September 24, 2013 as stated in the separate list of crimes from around September 18, 2013.

2. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court, the following facts can be acknowledged.

A. Case background

1) Establishment of H

A) On October 15, 2010, the Defendant decided to conduct Q, I, and cosmetics business, which he came to know through the introduction of P. At this time, the Defendant was a person holding a doctor’s degree in pharmacy in a prestigious university as if he was a well-known expert. Accordingly, around April 201, the Defendant took office as the representative director of R of a Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “R”) and took procedures to select a S business as a entrusted business entity (hereinafter referred to as “S business”). On July 15, 2011, the Defendant established H Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “H”) for the purpose of the production and sale of cosmetics and health food as its establishment. Meanwhile, the Defendant used the position as the president of H Research Institute.

B) Q submitted to Jan-gun an operational plan (Evidence No. 2) prepared by the Defendant, accompanied by a false career letter, false plaque, patent-related data, etc., while supporting Q in the name of R as an entrusted operator of the S business. On October 19, 201, R was selected as an entrusted operator of the S business.

C) Meanwhile, around June 2011, when the Defendant was running R and S business on January 20, 201, the Defendant: (a) sold two patents of Q and I by deceiving Q and I on the ground of his false educational background and career; and (b) acquired the total amount of KRW 150 million from creditors who borrowed the purchase price of a patent upon the request of Q and I; and (c) obtained by deceiving Q and I upon the request of Q and I; and (d) subsequently, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 3 years on the ground that the said judgment became final and conclusive.

2) Appointment of the representative director of L victim company and conclusion of an investment agreement with H

A) On October 201, Q recommended L to make an investment, immediately after R was selected as an entrusted business operator of the S business, to establish the above operational plan (No. 2 of the evidence record) and to hold the total sales right of a new material product using microorganisms made of Defendant’s technology in H.

B) L acquired the existing stock company and changed its trade name to J(victim 2) and took office on November 1, 201 as the representative director, and T, U, and V took office as each internal director.

C) On November 30, 201, the victim company entered into an investment agreement with H to the effect that the victim company would acquire 35% of the shares issued by H by investing 9 billion won in the new shares acquisition method, and that H would have a domestic monopoly’s right to sell py, electric leased lines, urine, and cosmetics-related products produced by H. Pursuant to the said investment agreement. The victim company paid to H an investment amounting to KRW 20 million on December 1, 201, and KRW 20 million on January 18, 2012, and KRW 520 million on February 3, 2012.

D) The victim company supplied Category 4 (W, X, Y, Z) products from H and paid KRW 466,178,190 in total to H from December 1, 201 to April 7, 2012. Meanwhile, the victim company entered into an agreement on the manufacture of the primary product (A, AB, and AC) with H on February 17, 201.

B. Conclusion of a share sales contract between the Defendant and the victim

1) According to the agreement made by Q, I, and AD with the victim company on February 28, 2012, the auditor as an investor of R, and the auditor notified that R and H shares are equally held by the said three parties and the increase or decrease of shares is possible only when the said three parties have agreed in writing, and that goods based on new materials developed by the Defendant will not be sold through other companies. The victim company sold the shares of H and the products supplied by H are criminal acts, and thus, suspended and changed.

2) Accordingly, L was present in company with the Defendant on March 15, 2012 and the first met with the Defendant. At this time, L asked L to the Defendant “a continuous investment in H or is supplied with goods from H?” and the Defendant asked L to the effect that “the Defendant is not in a superior, and is going to know about the company’s kis.”

3) On March 21, 2012, the Defendant met L, P, and AF. From the same place, a share sales contract was concluded between L, a representative L, the Defendant, and the victim company, to sell 60,000 shares of M Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “M”) owned by the Defendant to the victim company in total at KRW 300 million per share, and the Defendant received KRW 300 million from the victim company on the same day.

(c) Supply and payment under a contract for the supply of goods between the victim company and G;

1) The victim company entered into a contract for the supply of goods with G Co., Ltd. (the representative director, in-house director, the defendant, the AF, hereinafter referred to as "G3"), ① 226,50,000 won in total, and ② 60,000 won in each opening of May 18, 2012; ③ 300,000 won in each opening of 40 won; ④ 300,000 won in supply of AJ on July 26, 2012; ④ 3,500 won in each opening of 16,00 won in supply of goods to AK 3,50 won in each unit of 12 January 22, 2013; ② the above products or contracts include a special agreement for the supply of goods directly to the entrusted business entity.

2) According to the above goods supply contract, G supplied Class 7 products such as AH and other products that the Defendant entrusted through AL, etc. to the victim company, and the victim company paid the victim company a total of KRW 736,068,840, as shown in the attached list of crimes, by remitting money to G’s account and the above entrusted production company’s account from April 24, 2012 to September 24, 2013.

3) Meanwhile, there was a problem that the victim company sold and delivered prescription drugs as if they were functional health foods to investors, and the defendant, L, T, V, and the victim company was convicted of the violation of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act on September 18, 2014 (the defendant, 10 months of imprisonment, 8 months of imprisonment, 6 months of imprisonment, and 6 months of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended execution, 3 million won of fine for the victim company), and 5 years of appeal and appeal were all dismissed, and the above judgment became final and conclusive.

3. Determination

The following circumstances revealed by the facts of recognition as seen earlier, namely, (i) the Defendant made a false plaque while driving with false academic background and career, and used it for the purpose of proving his career; (ii) even if there was no technology for manufacturing cosmetics and health food, etc. by adding microbes, the victim company’s representative director made purchases from the Defendant on March 21, 2012 the amount of KRW 30 million of the M& 60 million (500 won) of the face value of stocks from the Defendant after dividing the talk about the Defendant’s future business progress; and (iii) in light of the current status of M& sales at the time, the above amount is more than the value; (iv) there is no evidence to deem that the products supplied by the victim company G were added with any microbe developed by the Defendant’s own technology with the Defendant’s inherent technology; and (iv) there is room to view that the Defendant was subject to criminal punishment for violation of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act.

However, considering the facts examined earlier and the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court, the evidence alone presented by the prosecutor is insufficient to acknowledge that the instant facts charged were proven without any reasonable doubt.

A. Circumstances leading to the instant complaint by L, etc.

1) The investors, including the AP, who purchased the shares of H and the victim company, filed a complaint against the executive officers of the victim company, including L, T, U, and V, for fraud, around May 2013. In addition, the above investors filed several complaints against L and other executive officers of the victim company and the defendant, and the investigation is under way.

2) On November 14, 2013, a victim company was appointed as the representative director of the victim company on the part of November 15, 2013, and the defendant was accused of fraud on November 15, 2013.6) However, in this court, AP only sought L's explanation that at the time of "the defendant's deception of the victim company, the defendant suffered losses by deceiving the victim company," and then it led to the above accusation, and later, it is true that "the victim company suffered losses by deceiving the defendant," is not a fact at all, since the relevant materials are grasped." (AP green 2, 4, 5, 10, 11, 12 pages).

3) L and T filed a complaint against the Defendant on July 10, 2014 where the first instance court was proceeding to investigate the said investor’s complaint case, and the said investor’s complaint case was tried on July 10, 2014.

4) While L et al. suffered enormous damages by being aware of the Defendant’s educational background and career experience at the latest, they did not take any measures against the Defendant until a complaint is filed against their act of selling the shares of their victim company. Moreover, L and T had already known that the victim company contacted L et al. and did not directly develop the products supplied by the Defendant at the time of receiving the cosmetics, etc. from G, even though L and T had already known that they did not directly develop the products supplied by the Defendant (the 24 pages of the witness record, the 13, and the 17 pages of the witness T.).

5) In light of the above circumstances, only after the complaint that "L et al. deceivings a large amount of money from investors as if they invested in the shares of the victim company" was filed, L et al. would have led to the complaint of this case. In light of the circumstances, there is no doubt that there was an intention to exempt the above liability, such as L et al. on the suspicion of investment fraud.

(b) Whether the injured party was unaware of the Defendant’s false educational background and career;

1) In light of the fact that the Defendant was committed with false academic and career, Q and I’s career, etc., the Defendant explained to L et al. that the Defendant was the authority in the pertinent field, as well as that R et al. stated the Defendant’s career in the data attached to the Operation Plan (Evidence No. 2) submitted by R et al. in relation to the selection of the entrusted company of the S business, it is possible for the victim company including L et al. to have deemed L et al. as an authoritative expert in the microbial field by deceiving the Defendant’s false academic and career by deceiving him/her into the Defendant’s false academic and career.

2) However, although the Defendant is a global authority in the field of micro-organism that he/she graduated from a prestigious company and obtained through the doctoral degree in foreign countries, it is difficult to accept the Defendant’s annual sales at the time of his/her absence of 100 million or 200 million won (Evidence No. 445 of the Evidence No. 645 of the Evidence No. ) under social norms that he/she had been an employee of a prestigious company, and that he/she had a considerable career in running business and attracting investments, such as serving as an officer of AR Co., Ltd. and participation in the sale of stocks of AS Co., Ltd. and AS Co., Ltd. before his/her previous operation plan, it is difficult to understand that the Defendant’s false education and experience were trusted by P and Q merely due to the fact that he/she had been aware of the Defendant’s academic background and experience in the above operation plan. ③ At the time, the Defendant did not directly appear to have been aware of the Defendant’s academic background and experience in the victim’s.

3) Therefore, it is difficult to readily conclude that the victim company, including L, was subjected to deception by the Defendant with false academic background and career.

(c) Circumstances in which, with the knowledge of the defendant's false educational background, career, etc., it is deemed that the defendant purchased the shares of the defendant or participated in the supply of goods;

1) The relationship between the victim company and H’s investment agreement and the sale of shares

A) On October 1, 2011, 201, L, immediately after R was selected as an entrusted business entity, was solicited to make an investment from Q Q, and was appointed as the representative director of the victim company on November 1, 201. T, U, and V was appointed as each in-house director. The investment agreement was concluded between T, U, and the victim company and H. Since December 201, L, along with T, to be supplied with the products developed with the Defendant’s micro-organism technology globally well-known, with T, U, etc. from December 201. H was engaged in the S business using the above technology. H was recruited to recruit sales agencies of the victim company, and sold H and the victim company’s stocks on a large scale (hereinafter L, 15, 20 pages, witness 75, 55, 12 pages).

B) However, in light of the fact that ① L et al. sold the shares of AR Co., Ltd. prior to the instant case to investors (Defendant AP green5 pages), ② L et al. transferred its head office to Seoul to acquire a local corporation and changed its head office to “J similar to “H”, and then it appears that the victim company notified the victim company as if it were the H affiliate and sold the victim company’s shares as well as the H’s shares (Defendant AP green 5 and 6 pages), ③ the victim company’s size, financial status, and operational performance, etc. were almost impossible to invest KRW 9 billion according to the initial investment agreement, considering that L et al. entered into an investment agreement with H through the victim company, it appears that L et al. would sell the shares of the company on the ground of sales agency or investor solicitation such as functional health foods.

2) As to the conclusion of the instant stock transaction and goods supply contract

A) AD’s investor, around February 2012, on the ground of an agreement between the Plaintiff and Q and I, raised an issue regarding the Investment Convention concluded between H and the victim company on November 30, 201. Since L and the victim company met the Defendant on March 15, 2012 and March 21, 2012, the victim company, including L, purchased M& shares held by the Defendant on March 21, 2012, even if there was no Defendant’s active demand, and around April 2012, G purchased goods to supply functional health foods, cosmetics, etc. to the victim company, and appointed the Defendant as the head of G research institute or senior research institute as a director of G, and paid the amount of KRW 100,000,000 as evidence (Evidence 10,000,000,000 won) from December 8, 2012.

B) In light of the following circumstances, it is reasonable to view that the victim company's purchase of the shares of the defendant or the participation of the defendant in the supply of goods with knowledge of the defendant's false educational background, career, etc. was due to the need of the victim company

① Although suspicions as to the Defendant’s substance were continuously raised within the victim company after January 2012, L, etc. did not directly verify the Defendant’s educational background and experience or take measures to confirm it to the relevant agency, L, etc., further produced the Defendant’s false plaque, and continued to promote the Defendant’s false educational background and experience, and continued to attract agents and investments by keeping it in the victim company’s office in addition to the SP green 15-16 pages), even if L had been well known of the Defendant for at least seven years (AP green 8,9 pages). Despite the occurrence of the internal dispute between H, the Defendant company’s side, including Q et al., who had officially promoted the Defendant’s business based on the Defendant’s business, had been in the situation where it is essential for the victim company including Q, to continue to attract agents and investment against investors in the victim company.

② At the time of attracting the investors of the victim company, L made a statement to the effect that "the stock price of J will be so wide as to start production by accepting the limited company", and that some investors have made a proposal to invest KRW 2 billion in order to acquire the limited company. At the end of 2012, " there has been an act of financial affairs for M in order to acquire the limited company." (Witness L 20-21 pages), and AP also stated that the victim company has publicly announced the acquisition plan for pharmaceutical affairs from the beginning and sold H shares (Witness 5 pages). The victim company's purchase of the defendant's shares was conducted as part of the business plan and publicity related to the above pharmaceutical acquisition company. At the time, the victim company, as the side of the victim company, made a statement to the effect that "the financial affairs for acquisition has been performed for M." (Witness L 20-21 pages), and made a statement to the effect that the victim company has made a net payment for the purchase and sale of shares and the acquisition of the limited company, rather than the actual value of shares.

③ G supplied by the victim company upon entering into a contract for supply of goods is changed to the trade name of F, a stock company run by AF (No. 4 rights 684, 686, 687 of the evidence record), and the representative director of AG was entrusted to AG and both the actual operation of the company and the preparation and conclusion of the contract for supply of goods were assigned to AF (No. 3 rights 194 of the evidence record), and AF was an employee of AT operated by AF around March 2012. In this process, the Defendant was not involved in the operation of G except for using the position or receiving benefits. In light of these circumstances, G was a company operated by a related person on the side of the victim company for the convenience of the delivery of functional health foods related to the business of the victim company rather than a company wholly separate from the victim company in charge of the representative director. During the process of entering into the above contract for supply of goods, the Defendant did not participate in the preparation and conclusion of the contract for supply of goods and conducted between AF and LF.

(d) Other circumstances;

1) LR investors and auditors sent a certificate of contents demanding LD to suspend the sale of products supplied by H to the victim company, and asked whether the defendant would be supplied with goods from I and H on March 15, 2012. However, the defendant asked P to the effect that "this situation would not be an issue between the company and the company," and that "the defendant would be able to provide 30 million won to the victim company with the product added to microorganisms through P and AF," and "the defendant would have paid 30 million won to the defendant under the condition that the defendant would receive 60,000 won of research and development funds," which is not a 30,000 won of research funds (Evidence No. 439-640 of the evidence record, which was not a 630,000 won of research and development funds, and it is also difficult to view that the defendant's 30,000 won of research funds and development funds were not provided to the victim company or that 300,000 won of research funds were not provided."

2) Even if there is no evidence to deem that there was a micro-organism added to certain products supplied by the victim company, including L, to the victim company around April 2012, or under the involvement of the defendant, G is operated by the related person on the part of the victim company for the convenience of the delivery of functional health foods related to the victim company's business, and the above contract for the supply of the above products was concluded by F and L, etc.; ② even if the defendant stated that he would make an order for the product with which he added a micro-organism with his own technology in the process, it is difficult to conclude that the defendant had been aware that it was false at the victim company's side, such as L, and concluded the above contract for the supply of the above goods by deceiving the defendant from the victim company and paid the price for the delivery after signing the above contract for the supply of goods; ③ It is difficult to view that the victim company did not directly develop the products from G to the victim company at the time of the victim company's failure to do so, or that the defendant did not know that it had been supplied the products to the victim company.

3) In the case where the investors who entered into a sales contract with the victim company filed a complaint, the following facts are the facts charged: “The defendant supplied the product as if the defendant developed new materials using micro-organism; L/U provided false educational background and experience by publicizing the defendant’s false educational background and experience and sold the products so that the general investors conspired to attract investment funds by deceiving the general investors in sequential order, and acquired the total amount of KRW 400 million from three victims, and the defendant and L/U was not detained and currently under trial (Seoul Central District Court 2016Dadan9514 case).

4. Conclusion

Therefore, since the facts charged in this case constitute a time when there is no proof of crime, the court acquitted the defendant pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and publicly announced the summary of the judgment of the defendant pursuant to Article 5

Judge Jin-hun

Judges Park Jong-chul

2) On the grounds for determining L’s trade name as “J”, H is the head office of the company and the company is an affiliate of the company, which is the general board, and ordered J to order its name (Evidence No. 3rd page 18).

3) Prior to the change, the trade name was changed to F, 2012, 23 April 23, 201.

4) Meanwhile, the injured company paid KRW 30,00,000 in the aggregate of the amounts specified in attached Table 17, 18 as down payment according to the AJ supply contract concluded with G, but when AJ was unable to be supplied with prescription, as it was a prescription, it was later impossible for G and the injured company to cover the said amount as part of the price of the goods to AI, and thereafter, by agreement between G and the injured company, the third right to evidence records, 198 pages of the witness record, and 29 pages of the witness record (hereinafter referred to as “ Germany”).

5) The summary of the facts of the crime found guilty is as follows. L, T and V received a claim from the victim company that there is no efficacy of OAI (OAI), which is a health food related to urology supplied by G and sold by the victim company, and conspired to provide and sell prescription drugs for urology treatment together with this. The Defendant purchased 60,000 amblance from the injured party for urology treatment, and supplied it to the victim company from April 23, 2012 to July 17, 2012, and supplied L, T and V to the victim company by supplying the above medicine to the seller from May 1, 2013."

6) The gist of the complaint is that "the defendant, on the ground of the false academic background and history, purchased and sold his product with an outstanding quality to L and the representative director of H, Q and the victim company, on the ground of the personal history of the pharmaceutical industry, the defendant's purchase and sale of the product with an excellent quality to L and T, the defendant, by deceiving him to be on the gambling day, had the victim company sell the product below quality, thereby making the victim company enter into a sales contract with H to pay the down payment of KRW 520,000,000 for down payment."

7) Meanwhile, L and Q filed a complaint, along with L and Q, on the suspicion that the Defendant and the victim acquired the amount of KRW 520 million and the amount of KRW 466,178,190,00,000 under the Investment Convention of November 11, 201 between H and the victim company, and that the Defendant and Q acquired the amount of KRW 520,000,000,000,000,000,000 were not subject to a disposition of non-prosecution on the ground of the lack of evidence.