The Defendant has operated the business office B

C There is no agreement to take over the above place of business from C, and the defendant did not have any intention or ability to take over the above place of business and make profits to the victim by taking over the two places of business even if the defendant received the money from the victim D, because the mother of the defendant thought to use the money as the hospital expenses, the monthly salary for the employees employed by the defendant, living expenses, etc.

Nevertheless, on August 18, 2015, the defendant is unable to take over the B's place of business by telephone from the victim D on August 18, 2015.

The phrase “to make an investment of at least KRW 2 million per month” is false, and it received from the injured party a transfer of KRW 11 million to the national bank account in E’s name on the same day.

On September 2, 2015, the Defendant continued to call the phone to the victim D on September 2, 2015, and received KRW 2 million from the victim to the national bank account in the name of F on the same day on the same day.

On September 11, 2015, the Defendant continued to call the phone to the victim D and received KRW 18 million from the victim E on the same day on the same day.

As such, the Defendant, as seen above, was accused of the victim and received a total of KRW 31 million from the damaged party for the purpose of making an investment three times.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Inquiry about the details of liquidity transactions;

1. Investigation report (C currency of the business office B);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (related to places where damage is inflicted) and a written confirmation of transaction details;

1. Relevant Articles of the Act and the choice of punishment concerning the facts constituting the crime;