Defendant 1 and five others

The maximum number of votes shall be

Law Firm Hanjin et al.

Applicant 1 and 5 others

Defendant 1 shall be punished by imprisonment for one year, and by a fine of 10,000,00 won for Defendant 6 corporation, respectively.

However, with respect to Defendant 1, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Defendant 1 and Defendant 6’s violation of the Act on the Regulation of Conducting Fund-Raising Business without Permission among the facts charged in the instant case

Defendant 2, 3, 4, and 5 are not guilty

All of the applicants for compensation are dismissed.

This Court revokes the decision to permit changes in indictment made on July 21, 2009.

【Criminal Power and Status of Defendants】

Defendant 1 was sentenced to a fine of 7 million won on November 5, 2001 due to a violation of the Act on the Regulation of Conducting Fund-Raising Business. On January 15, 2008, the Daegu District Court issued a summary order on February 22, 2008 to a fine of 3 million won due to a violation of the Door-to-Door Sales, etc. Act. The above summary order was finalized on February 22, 2008. On April 24, 2008, Defendant 1 was issued with a summary order of 3 million won due to a violation of the Door-to-Door Sales, etc. Act. Defendant 1 was the representative director of the Daegu District Court, Nonindicted Co. 3, 6 (hereinafter “Nonindicted Co. 3”; Defendant 6’s “Defendant Co. 6”; Defendant 4 (hereinafter “Nonindicted Co. 4”) registered as the representative director of the Defendant’s non-indicted Co. 2 (hereinafter “non-indicted Co. 2”) and was in fact operated by the above non-indicted Co. 27.

Defendant 6 Co., Ltd is a corporation established for the purpose of wholesale and retail business of cosmetics and consumer goods.

【Criminal Facts】

1. Violation of the Door-to-Door Sales Act by Defendant 1;

In order to establish, manage, or operate a multi-level marketing organization, the competent authority shall register it with the competent multi-level marketing organization, and shall not run the business without entering into a consumer damage compensation insurance contract, etc., and the multi-level marketing organization shall not impose an burden of at least 50,000 won per year, including excessive purchase

피고인은 대구 수성구 (이하 주소 생략) 소재 공소외 4 회사 본사 사무실 및 전국 135개 센터 및 지사 사무실에서 ‘우리 회사는 항균화장품 등 생활용품을 유통비용없이 판매함으로써 고수익을 창출하는 회사다. 26만 5천원을 내고 주3) 20만PV 에 해당하는 물품을 구매하면 후원수당과 추천수당을 받을 수 있는 다단계판매원이 될 수 있고, 하위 판매원의 모집 실적에 따라 후원수당 및 추천수당의 액수도 증가할 뿐만 아니라 판매원⇒실버⇒골드⇒에메랄드⇒다이아⇒더블다이아⇒폴라스타’로 직급이 승급되면서 추가로 영업지원금, 사이클수당, 직급공유수당을 지급받을 수 있다‘고 말하여 공소외 4 회사 등 4개 회사의 다단계판매원 등록 또는 자격 유지조건으로 판매원이 되고자 하는 자들로부터 26만5천원을 교부받고 주4) , 위와 같은 다단계판매조직을 운영하였다.

However, the multi-level organization operated by the defendant as multi-level seller was not registered as multi-level marketing business operator, and consumer damage compensation insurance contract was not concluded.

Accordingly, the Defendant did not register with the competent authority from January 16, 2008 to July 9, 2008, but did not enter into a multi-level marketing business. From March 1, 2007 to October 30, 2008, the Defendant established and operated a multi-level marketing organization without entering into a consumer damage compensation insurance contract, etc.; from March 1, 2007 to October 30, 2008, the Defendant imposed a burden of 50,000 won or more per annum, including the purchase of excessive goods, etc. on condition of registration or maintenance of qualification of multi-level marketing salespersons.

2. Defendant 6

Defendant 1, the representative director of the Defendant, at the date and time and place indicated in the above paragraph (1), did not register the Defendant’s business with the competent authority as described in the above paragraph (1), without entering into a contract, etc. of consumer damage compensation insurance, established and operated a multi-level marketing organization without entering into the contract, etc., and imposed an burden of 50,000 won or more

1. Defendants’ partial statement

1. Part of the prosecution examination protocol against the Defendants

1. Investigation protocol of Nonindicted 7 by the prosecution

1. The prosecutor’s statement concerning Nonindicted 8

1. Summary order dated January 15, 2008 2007 High Court Order 42411

1. The certified transcript of corporate register of compensation franchise, defendant 6, non-indicted 3, non-indicted 4, and non-indicted 2

1. An investigation report (verification of the details of a mutual aid agreement for Nonindicted Company 2's special sales mutual aid association, alteration of registration in multi-stage for Nonindicted Company 1, and attachment of report documents for closure);

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

○ Defendant 1: Articles 51(1)1, 13(1)2, 51(1)2, 23(1)12, 34 (a) 6, 53(1)6, and 22(1) (a) of the Door-to-Door Sales Act (a person who intends to become a seller bears the obligation to purchase excessive goods, etc. on condition of registration) of the Act on Door-to-Door Sales, Etc.; a person who establishes and operates a multi-stage sales organization without registration); and a person who intends to be a seller shall be punished by imprisonment.

○ Defendant 6 Company: Articles 57(1), 51(1)1, and 13(1) (the fact that a multi-level marketing organization is established and operated without registration) of the former Door-to-Door Sales, etc. Act (Amended by Act No. 10171, Mar. 22, 2010); Articles 51(1)2, 23(1)12, 34 (the fact that a multi-level marketing organization is operated without registration) , 53(1)6, and 22(1) (the fact that a person who intends to become a seller bears an excessive duty to purchase goods, etc. on condition that he/she is registered).

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Article 37 (former part), Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Code

1. Suspension of execution;

○ Defendant 1: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Dismissal of an application for compensation order;

Article 32(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings

The modification of the indictment shall be permitted only to the extent that the identity of the facts charged is recognized, and where there exists an application for modification of the indictment to the effect that the facts charged are added as the facts charged, the court shall dismiss the application for modification (Article 298(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act). The identity of the facts charged is maintained if the social facts, which form the basis of the facts, are the same in the basic point of view. However, in determining the identity of these basic facts, it shall be based on the Defendant’s act and social factual relations, and shall also take into account normative elements (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2002Do587, Mar. 29, 2002; 2008Do3656, Dec. 11, 2008; 2009Do1217, Jan. 14, 2010).

In light of the record, the prosecutor initially conspiredd with Defendant 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 to raise funds from many and unspecified persons without authorization or permission from the authorities, and agreed to pay the total amount of money or an amount in excess of the capital in the future, and engaged in the same business as the same as the attached crime list 56,194, 326,000 won over 6836 times in total. 2. The defendant 6 corporation, the representative director of the defendant, agreed to pay the total amount of money or an amount in excess of the capital in the future while raising funds from many and unspecified persons without authorization or permission from the authorities, and filed an application for an additional donation transaction with the defendant 1, 2, 3, 4, and 209, "the defendant corporation engaged in the business of receiving money in excess of the capital in the future, 3, 4, 5, and 200, the defendant corporation engaged in the act of selling money or any other similar act using the multilevel sales organization or any other similar act."

However, the initial criminal facts charged against the Defendants and the additional criminal facts added by the prosecutor upon application for changes in the indictment cannot be said to be the same as the basic facts in substantive concurrent relations with different elements of the crime, protected legal interests, and the attitude of the act.

Thus, this court's decision to permit amendments to Bill of Indictment as of July 21, 2009 is unfair, so it is revoked, and it is judged only to the original criminal facts against the defendants.

The violation of the Door-to-Door Sales, etc. Act, which causes the burden of 50,00 won or more on the condition of registration of multilevel

1. Defendant 1’s assertion

The company of this case can become a member of the purchase of goods exceeding 10,00 won, and 2,65,000 won is a requirement for receiving bonuses. Thus, Defendant 1 did not have to pay 2,65,000 won under the condition that multi-stage salesmen are registered or qualified.

2. Determination

In light of the provisions of subparagraphs 5 and 7 of Article 2 of the Door-to-Door Sales Act, in order to become a multi-level marketing salesperson under the Door-to-Door Sales Act, retail profits and bonuses should be recommended. If a person is entitled to only a "support allowance according to the sales performance of his own goods, etc." among the support allowances under Article 2 subparagraph 7 of the Door-to-Door Sales Act, and if a person is not paid a support allowance according to the sales performance of goods, etc. of his own goods, etc. or a subordinate salesman for supporting activities by recruiting a subordinate salesman, it is not allowed to obtain profits from such sales even if he is admitted to a subordinate salesman, and it is not possible to establish a multi-level marketing organization to expand organization in a successive and phased manner. Thus, such a person is not a multi-level marketing salesperson under the above Act (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Do7470, Jan. 25, 2007).

However, Defendant 1’s own purchase of goods of 265,00 won, but as a salesperson of the instant company, he is entitled to the first recommendation allowance and the first support allowance, etc., and Defendant 1’s “consumer” who purchased goods of 10,000 won is not in a position to receive such support allowance. Thus, this part of Defendant 1’s assertion cannot be accepted in light of the above legal principles.

1. Summary of the facts charged;

In order to establish, manage, or operate a multi-level marketing organization, the competent authority shall be registered.

피고인은 대구 수성구 (이하 주소 생략) 소재 공소외 4 회사 본사 사무실 및 전국 135개 센터 및 지사 사무실에서 ‘우리 회사는 항균화장품 등 생활용품을 유통비용없이 판매함으로써 고수익을 창출하는 회사다. 26만 5천원을 내고 주9) 20만PV 에 해당하는 물품을 구매하면 후원수당과 추천수당을 받을 수 있는 다단계판매원이 될 수 있고, 하위 판매원의 모집 실적에 따라 후원수당 및 추천수당의 액수도 증가할 뿐만 아니라 판매원⇒실버⇒골드⇒에메랄드⇒다이아⇒더블다이아⇒폴라스타’로 직급이 승급되면서 추가로 영업지원금, 사이클수당, 직급공유수당을 지급받을 수 있다‘고 말하여 공소외 4 회사 등 4개 회사의 다단계판매원 등록 또는 자격 유지조건으로 판매원이 되고자 하는 자들로부터 26만5천원을 교부받고 주10) , 위와 같은 다단계판매조직을 운영하였다.

However, the multi-level marketing organization operated by the defendant as multi-level marketing organization was not registered.

Accordingly, the Defendant, from July 10, 2008 to October 30, 2008, operated multi-level marketing business without being registered with the competent authority.

2. Determination

In light of the records, Defendant 1’s acquisition of Nonindicted Company 2, which was registered as a multi-level marketing business on May 10, 2008, and it can be acknowledged that Defendant 1 carried on the instant multi-level marketing business under the name of the company or another three companies from July 10, 2008. Thus, insofar as Defendant 1 carried on the instant multi-level marketing business under the name of the multi-level marketing business, it cannot be deemed that Defendant 1 operated the multi-level marketing business without registration.

However, as indicated in the attached list of this case submitted by the prosecutor, among multi-level marketing businesses after July 10, 2008, the multi-level marketing businesses operated in the name of Nonindicted Company 2 and in the name of three companies cannot be separated. Unlike the records of this case, there are no data to verify the same.

Therefore, since it cannot be deemed that all transactions after July 10, 2008 are engaged in multi-level marketing business without registration, this part of the facts charged is not guilty pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, or the crime of violation of the Door-to-Door Sales, etc. Act due to multi-level marketing, which is in the relation of the crime, is not guilty separately from the order.

1. Summary of the facts charged;

No one shall without permission, permission, etc. from an authority to make an agreement to pay the full amount of investment or an amount in excess thereof to an unspecified number of persons without any permission, etc., for the purpose of receiving money, etc. for investment, etc., and a multi-level marketing organization shall neither conduct any financial transaction without performing any transaction of goods, etc. nor conduct any actual monetary transaction in disguise of any transaction of goods, etc. using a multi-level marketing organization similar thereto.

Defendant 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 may purchase goods from March 1, 2007 to October 30, 2008 (hereinafter the address omitted) with the head office of Non-Indicted Party 4 located in Daegu Suwon-gu (hereinafter the address of Non-Indicted Party 135,000 won as a member if they purchase goods in an amount equivalent to 2,65,000 won at the 1.5 million won nationwide and at the 1.5 million won as a member if they purchase goods, they can purchase goods with an order of 6.6 million won as business support expenses within one year; 6 million won as a whole if they purchase goods with an order of 1,3 million won as business support expenses; 6.6 million won as a whole if they purchase goods with an order of 6.6 million won as a whole; 1.6 million won as a consumer price in the case of purchasing goods with an order of 6.6 million won as a result of offering goods with an equivalent amount of 3 million won or more as a consumer price.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to raise funds from many and unspecified persons without obtaining authorization or permission from the authorities, and agreed to pay the total amount of investment or an amount exceeding it in the future, and imported total of KRW 56,194,326,000 through 6836 times as shown in the attached list of crimes.

2. Defendants’ assertion

The Defendants handled about 130 kinds of products, such as Genic Products Group (food fiber, Croquerel, Nuclear Products, etc.), beauty shamper Products Group (Hindi, shampoo and shampoo, cosmetics, etc.), Nano Products Group, and other commodities group. The prices are all 10,000 won or 480,000 won. The prices are all daily raw materials. The prices purchased by the members are almost the same as the market prices at which they are supplied to the department department department and Gangnamnam New World department department department. In fact, the sales clerks ordered the goods through purchase application, and all of them were delivered to the company, and submitted an application for return in case of goods purchased by the sales clerks. In light of the fact that all of them were returned, it is difficult to view that they traded the goods of this case or traded the goods of this case without any justifiable reason.

3. Determination

Article 3 of the Act on the Regulation of Conducting Fund-Raising Business without Permission (hereinafter "the Act on the Regulation of Fund-Raising Business without Permission") provides that "the act of importing money by promising to pay an amount in whole or in excess of the amount of investment to the future" under subparagraph 1 of Article 2 as one of the acts of fund-raising business without permission or authorization under the related Acts and subordinate statutes. The legislative intent of regulating fund-raising business is to protect good traders and to establish a sound financial order by regulating the acts of fund-raising from many and unspecified persons under the pretext of investment or deposit, etc. Thus, in light of the legislative intent or the meaning of the term "contribution" under the same Act, it is difficult to regard the revenue of fund-raising business, which is actually mediated, as the revenue of fund-raising business, is likely to be regarded as the revenue of fund-raising business, and thus, if it can be viewed as having actually received money without the transaction of goods, it shall be deemed as an act of fund-raising business without permission under the Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2003Do27407.

However, according to the records, some buyers ordered goods or ordered goods in order after one week from the payment of the price for the goods, and they can be seen as having purchased goods rather than the purchase of the goods because of the fact that they need to be accumulated in the house or dividing them to the neighboring persons, but it can be seen as having been given support allowances and sales support. Meanwhile, all the goods handled by the defendants cannot be regarded as non-valueable goods because they are handled in the department store. Although it is difficult for them to conclude that there are no orders for some members, it is difficult for them to do so, but it is difficult for them to do so, in light of the above fact that they do not have ordered goods, five million won or more than 6 million won from the sale price for the goods, and one million won or more from the sale price for the goods of this case, but it is difficult to conclude that the goods are worth one million won or more from the sale price for the goods of this case to be distributed to the majority, but it is difficult to say that they are not worth one million won or more from the shop.

Therefore, this part of the facts charged constitutes a case where there is no proof of crime and thus, is acquitted under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure

1. Summary of the facts charged

At the date, time, time, and place mentioned in the above paragraphs (1) and (2), Defendant 1, the representative director of the Defendant, did not register the Defendant’s business with the competent authority as described in the above paragraphs (1) and (2), without entering into a contract, etc. of consumer damage compensation insurance, opened and operated a multi-level marketing organization without entering into the contract, etc., imposing an annual burden of not less than 50,000 won, including excessive purchase of goods, etc. on condition of registration or maintenance of qualification of multi-level marketing salespersons, and agreed to pay the total amount of investment or the amount in excess thereof to an unspecified number of unspecified persons without obtaining authorization, permission, etc., and imported the contribution as a business of fund-raising without permission from the authority, and only carried out a financial transaction without any transaction of goods, etc.

2. Determination

For the same reason, Defendant 1’s act of this case is difficult to be seen as an act of fund-raising without permission and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, this part of the facts charged constitutes a case where there is no evidence of crime and thus, Defendant 1 acquitted.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

interest as determined by the judge

(1) The indictment of summary as to Defendant 6’s representative director who is a non-registered multi-corporate director from March 25, 2007 to September 22, 2007

(2) The indictment of a summary on the ground that the representative director of Nonindicted Co. 3 was operated by an unreported door-to-door seller from July 25, 2007 to February 2008.

Note 3) In general, the reference point that is given to the product as the weak of the Company’s internal allowances, on the basis of the payment of the Company’s internal allowances.

4) A total of 9,398 members who have joined the first sale 265,00 won on one day are total of 2,490,470,000 won.

Note 5) From No. 1 to 3310 attached table 1 to

Note 6) The above amount is finally changed to October 30, 2009.

7) Defendants 1 and 6 were indicted for violating the Door-to-Door Sales, etc. Act.

8) If a crime in the relation of substantive concurrent crimes, as in the instant case, is permitted in the form of changes in indictment, not in the form of additional indictment, it may lead to an unreasonable outcome in light of the attitude of the Supreme Court precedent that the period of the first indictment should be based not on the changed indictment, but rather on the date of the first indictment. If a change in indictment is made in the appellate court, it may cause various unreasonable points, such as deprivation of the interests of the court in the case of a change in indictment, so it is reasonable to permit it even if there is an aspect contrary to the economy of

9) In general, the reference point that is given to the product as the weak of the Company on the basis of the payment of the internal allowances to the Company as the value of point and poisme.

Note 10) Total number of 9,398 members who have joined the first sale 265,00 won on one day, and total amount of 2,490,470,000 won

Note 11) According to the contents of the interrogation protocol of Defendant 1 (Investigation Record 1,320) and the card approval statement of Nonindicted Company 2 in the investigation record No. 209, Defendant 1 appears to have operated multi-level marketing business in the name of the above company from July 10, 2008.

Note 12) In the case of the second sale, one million won, five million won, six million won, one million won, one million won, one million won, and two million won or more, and in the case of the second sale, the principal shall be guaranteed. In the case of the second sale, the structure which makes it possible for the salespersons to achieve the same PV with a small amount of money, and makes it possible for them to select the second sale of the same amount of money, and thereby making the salesperson's retail profit and purchase of goods in an indefinite manner that guarantees profits of the principal or more without the release of goods.

Note 13) According to the 1073 investigation records, the number of public sales exceeding five million won during the period from March 1, 2007 to November 6, 2008 is 6,785 cases (Article 853 of the investigation records), and the above 302 items on the records are not deemed to have been permanently released after the fact that the above 6,785 items were purchased without specifying the period, but they were not yet released.