The defendant shall be innocent.

(2) With respect to the act of receiving money without permission by public offering, the defendant was not a simple investor who is not an employee of E but has been engaged in the act of receiving money without permission, and there was no intention of joint processing between E and the person who has been engaged in the act of receiving money without permission, and there was no fact that the defendant shared the act of performing the act of receiving money without permission) and the decision of the court of unfair sentencing.2.

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the first instance court and the trial court as to the fraud, namely, ① there was no fact that the Defendant was involved in the decision-making process or operation as the lowest investor who did not have any position in E, ② the Defendant trusted the E’s investment recommendation that he would have been able to make a large amount of national tax payment shares and invested the volume of KRW 200 million in E, and ③ the Defendant was able to know the financial resources of the profits that the Defendant would pay to investors, the status of profit-making business, and whether the Defendant actually invested in profit-making business.

(4) At the time of introducing E to the victim, the profits would have been normally paid to the investors. (5) The facts charged of the fraud in this case are not included in the elements of deception. The omission by the defendant did not provide information about the investment attraction fee to the victim is not included in the elements of deception. The contents of deception in the facts charged are different from the contents of deception.