2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

A. Defendants B and C’s status, and C, from December 2014, recruited investment funds while operating the Gwangju Regional Center of E, a similar recipient company, from around December 2014.

B. On March 27, 2015, the Plaintiff sought an investment explanation from Defendant B and C, and transferred KRW 13 million to the account of Defendant D (Defendant C’s father) informed by Defendant C on March 27, 2015.

C. On June 14, 2016, the prosecutor of the Gwangju District Prosecutors’ Office (1) was convicted of a crime that found Defendant B and C guilty of fraud, and Defendant B and C invested in Defendant B and C’s business, and transferred most of the investments made by investors of the Gwangju Center to the head office. In full view of the fact that it is difficult to deem that Defendant B and C had an intent to acquire the investment money, Defendant B and C made a disposition of non-prosecution on the ground that it is difficult to deem that Defendant B and C had an intention to acquire the investment money. (2) Defendant B and C agreed to pay the investment amount in the future without obtaining authorization, permission, registration, report, etc. under the Acts and subordinate statutes, and received the investment amount from an unspecified number of individuals, and the prosecutor appealed against this, and continued to file an appeal with the Gwangju District Court Decision 2016No2964 at the present time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 1, 2, and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that Defendant B and C conspired by deceiving the Plaintiff by attracting investment, thereby defrauding the Plaintiff KRW 13 million from the Plaintiff, and Defendant D provided the Defendant B and C with his own account, thereby participating in the Defendant B and C’s tort.

Therefore, the Defendants jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 13 million and damages for delay.

3. Determination

A. Even if a certain person is subject to criminal punishment by directly or indirectly taking part in the business of a fund-raising company without permission, such fact alone is sufficient.