An applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

1. Around September 2011, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim R in the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Office (AE Office located in 401, Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Office, stating that “If investments are made to women-only dedicated Switzerland E, the Defendant would pay a higher interest rate of 5% per month, and return the principal without a mold or reduce E shares if the investors wish to do so.”

However, the fact is that the over-sect project promoted by the defendant is continuously raising investment funds and paying the profits from the funds first invested out of the investment funds, and it is not a situation where the over-sect project can be properly carried out, and even if receiving the investment funds from the victim, there was no intention or ability to return the principal.

Nevertheless, the Defendant was issued a total of KRW 80 million on October 21, 201 from the victim’s new bank account under the name of the Defendant and KRW 200 million on October 24, 201, including KRW 120 million on the 24th day of the same month.

2. On March 2012, the Defendant made the victim R at the Seocho-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Y(Y) office located in X-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City on March 1, 2012, with the aim of creating a store and agency with 700 direct sales stores and agencies with 3DS golf machines supplied. The Defendant sold 500 foot stocks at a low price by expanding the direct sales store upon receiving a real estate auction and again made a direct sales store with the money. On the end of the year, the Defendant made a false statement that “The Y will invest Y in Y that the 500 foot stocks at par value at 10,000 won at the end of the year, 20,000 won at the end of the year, and if listed

However, the fact that Y was not a situation in which the prospect for business profitability is uncertain and the business could not be properly carried out in the structure of re-distribution of investment funds through investor solicitation, and even if the victim received investment funds, there was no intention or ability to return the principal.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, as such, deceiving the victim and deceiving it from the victim to the bank account in the name of the Y (State) representative Z, with the amount of KRW 50 million on March 9, 2012, and April 2012.