사기등
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.
Punishment of the crime
The defendant is the auditor of Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Daejeon, who was in charge of the overall fund management of the above company, and Eul is the inside director of the above company and the actual representative.
1. The Defendant, along with E, established the above company’s regional center in Seoul, Busan, and Daegu, provided an investment explanation as if he could gain a lot of profits through the operation of the Internet gambling site, and had the intent to attract investment funds from many investors.
On June 13, 2012, the Defendant stated to the Seoul Center located in the F Apartment B 503 Dong, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, the Seoul Center head G, that “The victim H, introduced through the Seoul Center head G, may raise a huge amount of revenue if he/she operates earth and sports games through the Internet, and at the same time, carries out video-making activities through smartphones. The investment is to pay the principal after paying 5% of the amount of each share investment as interest. Upon introducing another person, the Defendant shall pay the principal after the month when he/she pays 5% of the amount of each share as interest. On introducing another person, 2.5% of the recommended allowance shall be paid separately, and 2.5% shall be additionally paid as the management allowance if the head is the head
However, the above company was established mainly for the wholesale and retail business of health-supporting foods, and its initial capital was limited to KRW 1,00,000,000, and it began to use the investment funds received from subordinated investors from subordinated investors from the beginning stage by excessively attracting investment funds, such as paying 5% of the investment funds for interest as interest, etc. In order to secure initial funds, and the payment of interest to senior investors was merely merely merely merely merely merely a subscription to attract investment funds from investors, and there was no fact that it had established an actual program, and eventually, there was no intention or ability to pay profits under an agreement to investors, so long as no new investment is continued.
The defendant.