The Defendant is a person who sets up a new stude of “F” on the first floor of the E building located in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and engages in activities as an infinite by using a non-finite name of “G.”

1. On June 2015, the Defendant against the victim H expressed that “the victim H should have governance” at the above new party.

A person shall be entitled to receive the payment of the deposit in trust.

If you do not receive a new picture, the life of the width is not just the moment it is not net, and there will be a friendly return to the family, and the health condition of the width will also be worse.

“A false representation was made.”

However, even if the Defendant received money from the injured party, he/she did not have the intent or ability to continue to perform an act without delay. As above, as if he/she did not perform the contract, he/she notified the injured party of the same specific and threatened risk to his/her family members. As such, as if he/she did not have any objective effect, he/she deceiving the injured party as if he/she had the right to perform the contract, and thereby, he/she was given the injured party a total of KRW 15 million of cash and checks in consideration of the cost of the new right

2. On July 8, 2015, the Defendant against the victim I: (a) around July 8, 2015, the victim I considered the method of mutual influence with a female-friendly woman-friendly Gu in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City’s influence; (b) “Influence, the Defendant used the enemy, and returned to the fluent female-friendly Gu influence, if he/she had the right to receive the payment.

Along with the probability of 1,00%, women's friends will be returned to the Korean women's friends, as well as the marriage with women's friends.

“A false representation was made.”

However, it is true that the Defendant could not have any effect on the part of the victim, even if the Plaintiff had the right of rescission on behalf of the victim, and thus, even if he did, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to make the victim go against the intent of the victim as well as the ability to make the victim go against the intent of the victim. However, it is true to the effect that it is necessary for the Defendant to exercise the right of rescission by making the victim believe that the Defendant’s speech is hard.