The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The Defendant of the facts charged in the instant case is a person who operates the Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Dispute Resolution E-1st 1507-1, the F-F, and engages in real estate sale business and agricultural products distribution business.

On February 2, 2014, the defendant is operating a factory related to the withering export in the office of the Fashman E, and G.

It is not necessary to pay the personnel expenses of the factory workers rapidly.

Within a week, H I’s representative agreed to invest KRW 500 million in the Sari Project. It was false to the effect that, if 30,000 won is loaned, 15% interest shall be paid after a day.

However, it is extremely unclear whether to invest KRW 500,000 in the business of the defendant's Sama H in this case. In the case of "business of producing and selling Sama on-the-spot death in Peru," the defendant's personal funds was almost not invested, and the defendant was operated in another place, but it was difficult to operate the business normally due to the shortage of funds, but it was difficult to operate the business normally due to the shortage of funds. This was due to the low quality of products produced in Peru, which was distributed at a price of 20% compared to the commercial market. The profits from the Nama's revenue and sale were also paid directly to the existing creditors related to the business. At that time, the defendant was unable to obtain profits from the above business, such as making a payment directly to the existing creditors related to the business, while the defendant was in bad credit, while he did not have any intention or ability to pay the bonds amounting to KRW 50,000,000,000 from G due to lack of any special property or income.

On February 28, 2014, the Defendant received KRW 10 million from G to one bank account (K) in the name of J, and KRW 20 million in the sum of KRW 30 million from L’s agricultural bank account (M).

As a result, the defendant was delivered property by deceiving G.

2. According to the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor, the Defendant’s “business of producing and selling Peruvian local deadly” promoted by N (hereinafter “instant case”).