A. On June 23, 2011, the Defendant: (a) recommended the victim F to make an investment in the five-story building located in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Daejeon District Court G at the education center of Gangnam-gu, Daejeon District Court to make an investment in the five-story building, which is in progress in the support of the Daejeon District Court; (b) “The above apartment building is in progress by auction; (c) the investment value of the lien is high.

When investing funds, it will be possible to purchase lien in the name of the corporation and receive dividends.

It shall be refunded at least 40% of the annual revenue to the investment fund.

“A false representation was made.”

However, since the Defendant did not have any particular property, the principal and profit was paid to the victim during the above auction procedure, but some of them received investment from outside investors and reported the claim directly under the name of outside investors. Some of them planned to report the claim under the Defendant’s own name after receiving investment from outside investors. If the outside investors and the Defendant participated in the distribution under their own name, the ratio of the outside investors’ investment funds to the outside investors was much higher than the ratio of the outside investors’ investment funds. Thus, the ratio of the dividend that can be paid to the Defendant’s name was limited to about 20%.

In addition, since the defendant borrowed or invested money from many people in the course of acquiring bonds in his/her own name and his/her personal debt has been about KRW 290 million, even if the defendant received dividends in the name of the defendant in the auction process, the personal creditors or investors against the defendant were highly likely to seize the defendant's right to receive dividends.