For the following reasons, the lower court found all of the facts charged of this case guilty was erroneous.

The point of fraud: ① The expression that the defendant expressed as if he was related to R Co., Ltd. is merely an exaggerated advertisement, not an act of deceiving victims.

(2) Since investors are recruited in accordance with the multi-stage business profit model and dividends have been actually distributed, the defendant did not have the intention to acquire the dividends by deception.

(3) The victims shall not be deemed to have suffered any property loss because they received an amount equivalent to the amount of investment.

The point of occupational breach of trust: ① The defendant did not have the intention of occupational breach of trust because he obtained the consent of the executive officers of the company to return the money to the company after using the corporate card.

② Since the Defendant returned the above money to the company after using the card, there was no loss of property.

Unfair sentencing: The court below's punishment (7 million won of fine) against the defendant is too unreasonable.

Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the fact that the Defendant deceivings the victims as stated in the instant facts charged can be recognized.

Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances, the Defendant’s act of advertising the instant company’s profit structure and receiving investment funds from the victims constitutes deception of fraud.

Even if a certain exaggeration or falsity is involved in the publicity and advertisement of goods, if it is possible to take place in light of the general commercial practice and the good faith principle, it cannot be said that he/she deceivings him/her to use it as a starting point, and detailed facts about important matters in the transaction.