On March 22, 2014, the Defendant got reliance on the victim’s 10,000 shares of PepsiCos by having the victim receive 10,000 shares of PepsiCos from the victim, on the following grounds: (a) the Defendant called “the victim D will with an advertising that the victim would with with the outside-of-the-counter share with with the intention of doing so; and (b) the PepsiCos will buy 10,00 shares of the PepCos.” (c) the Defendant came to obtain reliance from the victim by sending 10,00 shares as agreed upon.

1. On March 27, 2013, the Defendant sent to the victim text pictures related to the stock return, saying, “The Defendant would be able to guarantee the principal and the profits from which he/she would with with a capital with a capital option, and make two times the capital to be invested in a futures option.”

However, at the time of fact, the Defendant did not have a job and did not own property, and the Defendant was required to pay personal obligations exceeding KRW 44,50,000 in total to creditors F, G, H, I, J, etc. who met the loss of his/her futures option or borrowed investment funds, and thus there was no intention or ability to guarantee the principal and profit by investing in the futures option for the victim even if he/she received the said money.

The Defendant, on March 27, 2013, deposited 2,500 shares of K Company, equivalent to KRW 6,375,00,00, into the Samsung Securities account in the name of L (M) around March 27, 2013, and received KRW 3,625,000 on March 27, 2013, KRW 5,000 on March 28, 2013, and KRW 20,000 on March 29, 2013 from the victim as the husband of each Defendant’s bank account (O) in the name of N, the husband of each Defendant, and received KRW 2,500 on four occasions in total from the victim. < Amended by Act No. 11637, Mar. 27, 2013; Act No. 11625, Mar. 29, 2013>

2. On March 27, 2013, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant would make profits by purchasing P shares, which are the shares, and selling P shares,” at the victim’s request.

However, at the time of fact, the defendant did not have a job and did not own property, and incurred its futures options.