Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and the purport of the appeal are the judgment of the first instance.

A. Nonparty C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) is a company established on May 2007 to engage in the business of receiving similar amounts and multi-level monetary transactions.

B. The Defendant managed the branch office of Gwangju Branch and took charge of attracting investors through business explanation, etc.

The Plaintiff is an investor invested in the foregoing Gwangju branch.

(c)

From May 31, 2007 to October 16, 2008, the defendant, in collusion with the non-party D, paid the principal of each share by applying the return rate of 50% if it has invested more than 1 to 10 old shares, 30% if it has invested more than 1 to 20 old shares, 40% if it has invested more than 21 old shares, and 50% if it has invested more than 21 old shares, and paid the proceeds in installments for 32 weeks from the date of payment of the redemption of the next share as of the end of the gold day.

In addition, when a promotion is made according to the results of attracting subordinate investors, class allowances shall be paid, and class incentives and branch subsidies shall also be paid.

“The Plaintiff and other investors respectively received the investment money by means of the manner referred to in the purport of “.”

(d)

On May 7, 2009, the Defendant was convicted of three years of suspended sentence for a year of imprisonment due to a violation of the Door-to-Door Sales Act and a violation of the Act on the Regulation of Similar Receiving Act (hereinafter “instant illegal act”). [The Seoul Central District Court 2007 High Court 1375-2, 2008 High Court 1247, 209 High Court 10, 2009 High Court 10, 2009 High Court 10, 2009] on the ground that the Defendant did not appeal, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on the 15th of the same month (hereinafter “instant criminal judgment”). The Plaintiff’s investment amount in the daily list of crimes attached to the above judgment is the sum from September 3, 2008 to October 14, 2008.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Gap evidence Nos. 7 and 8-1, 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. 1) The Act on the Regulation of Similar Receiving Acts in the relevant legal doctrine is applicable.