2018Gohap627A. Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud)

(Partially Recognized Crime: Fraud)

(b) Fraud;

C. Violation of the Act on the Regulation of Conducting Fund-Raising Business without Permission

2018 early 2035, 2154, 2188, 2303, 2398, 2428, 2520, 2522, 2568;

2592, 2646, 2790, 2866

1. A;

2. B

Kim Byung-Appellee (prosecution), and Song-chul (Public trial)

Law Firm Dongin (Defendant A)

Attorney Kim Jin-ok, Attorney Kim Jin-ok

Attorney Man-ju (for the defendant B)

1. C (2018 early 2790, Defendant A)

2. D (with respect to Defendant A, 2018 Seocho 2522, and Defendant A)

3. E (2018 Early 2154, Defendants)

4. F (with respect to Defendant B, 2018 early 2592)

5. G (as against Defendant A, 2018 Seocho2646)

6. H (as against Defendant A, 2018 Seocho 2035, 2035)

7. I (2018 early 2428, Defendants)

8. J (as to Defendant A, 2018 Seocho 2568, Defendant A)

9. K (2018 Seocho 2520, Defendant A)

10. L (for Defendant A, 2018 early 2188)

11. M (as against Defendant A, 2018 early 2398)

12. N (as against Defendant A, 2018 early 2303, Defendant A)

13. 0 (with respect to Defendant B, 2018 early 2592)

14. P (as against Defendant A, 2018 early 2866)

Law Firm Q (for an applicant for compensation, O and F)

Attorney R R

December 21, 2018

Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.

Of the facts charged in this case, the following facts are as follows: [Attachment 1] Nos. 550 through 555 (Attached 2) with respect to the Defendants, Nos. 707 through 720 (Attached 2 crime sight table Nos. 528 through 541), violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes due to fraud listed in the list of the above crimes Nos. 902 through 911 (Attached 2 crime sight table Nos. 675 through 684) and the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes due to the fraud, Nos. 263, 264 (Attached 192, 193), Nos. 821 (Attached 2 crime sight table Nos. 617), the list of the crime sights Nos. 881, 882 (Attached 28 through 541), Defendant Nos. 26965, 2975).

The summary of each part of the judgment against the Defendants shall be published.

All of the applicants for compensation are dismissed.

Criminal facts

1. The Defendants’ status, etc.

Defendant A established and operated S Co., Ltd (hereinafter referred to as “S”) for the purpose of producing and distributing cultural content around April 19, 2010, and Defendant B is the largest shareholder and representative director of S, and Defendant B is a business director and shareholder of S from August 2015 to September 2017 (15% of equity) and is in charge of the management of the said company’s business team and the investor attraction and investment solicitation business. Defendant A aggravated S’s financial situation due to the lack of investment demand in the shock content business, “T promoted around October 2014,” which was introduced as a specialist of attracting investment money, around July 2015 to August 20, 2015, or Defendant B received a certain amount of money from Defendant B by guaranteeing the principal of investment at maturity and raising a certain rate of money for each month of investment. As such, Defendant B can easily use S’s investment funds.

Accordingly, Defendant A entered Defendant B as a business director of S around August 2015, and Defendant B, as a business director of S, took overall control of the business team composed of the so-called “business operator in charge of attracting investment” in U, V, W, etc., and was engaged in the business of attracting investment. Defendant A conspired to attract investment by explaining that Defendant B and business operators would return the principal of the investment at maturity and pay dividends equivalent to the agreed rate of interest.”

2. Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud), fraud;

According to the public invitation as described in paragraph 1, at around February 2016, at S Office located in the 6,7th floor of the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government X Building, the Defendants show the victim I’s publicity data, and S, at the Paris site, directly photographed 'S France community Y(Z)' in Paris and sold it to the domestic theater, and at least KRW 4,00,000,000, maximum of KRW 9,900,000,000, and the amount of net income equivalent to KRW 9,90,000,000 may be raised, and otherwise, the Defendants may increase enormous profits through various content businesses such as ‘T', ‘AB', ‘AB', and ‘AC', and if money is invested in S, the Defendants will use the above content business to make an investment and pay the principal monthly dividends equivalent to 3.12 months for the investment profits.’

However, in the case of the above content business, it was difficult for the Defendants to make profits from the above content business within a short period as if they were promised by the victims, because they had the authority to permit the time of distribution of S's VID. The Defendants did not have the possibility of making profits from the above Y content business in the amount of KRW 4,000,000 to KRW 9,000,000 through the above Y content business. In fact, the profits from the above Y content business were 200,000,000, and the profits from the other Y contents business were 700,000,000,000,000, in particular, the considerable amount of the investment profits from the victim I received from the above victim I, in addition to the above victim I, even if they did not have the ability to pay the principal and dividends to the majority investors, such as so-called "the ability to pay the principal and redemption" as the principal or redemption.

Nevertheless, on February 26, 2016, the Defendants, by deceiving the victim as above, received KRW 60,00,00 from the victim AD Bank account (AE) up to May 25, 2017 KRW 20 times, such as receiving KRW 1,480,00,00 from 20, KRW 675, KRW 2740, KRW 785, KRW 1665, KRW 275, KRW 765, KRW 275, KRW 765, KRW 865, KRW 865, KRW 275, KRW 465, KRW 765, KRW 865, KRW 275, KRW 465, KRW 275, and KRW 865, KRW 275, KRW 465, and KRW 865, KRW 465, and KRW 275,565, May 27, 2018, by means of false statement.

3. Violation of the Act on the Regulation of Conducting Fund-Raising Business without Permission.

No person shall engage in any fund-raising business without obtaining authorization or permission under Acts and subordinate statutes or making a registration or report, etc. to an unspecified number of persons without making an agreement to pay the total amount of investments or money exceeding the amount of investments in the future and raise funds, such as receiving investments.

Defendants and S agreed to the effect that, as described in paragraph (2), many investors will immediately repay the total amount of the investment and pay 1% or 4% of the principal of each month as dividends, as stated in [Attachment 102, 104 or 107, 263, 264, 343, 519, 519, 519, 50 through 532, 64, 645, 645 through 275, 208 or 97, 207, 107, 275 or 97, 207, 107, 264 or 106, 275 or 106, 207, 275 or 106, 207, 365 or 47, or 57, or 197, or 57, or 365, or 207, or 368, or 275, or 365, or

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each legal statement of I and AF;

1. Each prosecutor's interrogation protocol against the Defendants

1. A copy of each police interrogation protocol on V, AG, U, W, AH, AI, AJ, AJ, AL, AM, AM, AO, H, AP, Q, AR, AS, ATS, AU, AV, AW, and AX;

1. Each police statement made in relation to I (part),Y, AZ, BA, B (part), and BC;

1. Copy of the statement of the police concerning the AZ (Evidence No. 57);

1. A copy of the complaint, and the investment prospectus, contract, and transfer statement attached thereto;

1. Seizure records;

1. Investigation report (related to the files of seizure of items 17 "" in the list of seizure) and investment list attached thereto (Evidence No. 36);

1. Full certificate of matters to be registered, written investment agreement, statement of transactions, note, investment prospectus for business advertising, Y (BC), BD text messages, copy of BD text messages (I-A), SBC, list of S business operators, list of investors, list of S public relations data, copy of S promotional materials, record (I-A), copy of business registration certificate (S), copy of each investment agreement (Evidence No. 28), business team list and account number list (Evidence No. 30), business team list (Evidence No. 32), each investment list (Evidence No. 34,38), investment list (Evidence No. 40,46, 48, 50, 53, 56), list of accounts and transaction details (Evidence No. 40, 46, 48, 50, 56), list of accounts (Evidence No. 1867, 786, 786, 78686, 7686, 7686, 786, 7686, 7866, 668

1. Article 3(1)2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes, Article 347(1) and Article 30 of the Criminal Act ( comprehensively including frauds against victim I), Articles 347(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act (with the exception of I, frauds against victims other than the I and choice of imprisonment respectively by each victim), Articles 6(1) and 3 of the Act on the Regulation of Conducting Fund-Raising Business without Permission, Article 30 of the Criminal Act

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes (defendants);

Each of them, Article 37 (former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act shall be the most severe penalty provided for in the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud)

1. Dismissal of an application for compensation order;

A. Articles 32(1)1 and 26(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of P Litigation, an applicant for compensation, (this case’s argument was filed on December 17, 2018, which was after the closing of argument)

(b) Articles 32 (1) 3 and 25 (3) 3 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings for the remaining applicants for compensation except P who are applicants for compensation (the existence or extent of liability for compensation is not clear);

Judgment on the defendants' and defense counsel's arguments

1. Determination as to Defendant A and the defense counsel’s assertion

A. As to each of the crimes listed in [Attachment 1] 103 and 108, Defendant A and the defense counsel asserted to the effect that S did not receive each of the above money for each of the crimes listed in [Attachment 1] 103 and 108, respectively, the Defendant A and the defense counsel did not receive the above money for each of the crimes listed in [Attachment 1] 103 and 108. As to the crimes listed in [Attachment 1] 10,00,000 in the name of “BF” in the name of “AD Bank Account (Account Number BE) in the name of S on April 4, 2017 (Investigation Record No. 3.848), Defendant B and the victim BF (BF). Accordingly, Defendant B and the defense counsel were not entitled to receive the above 100,000,000 investment agreement on April 4, 2017 (Investigation Record No. 806, 106).

B. As to the crimes listed in the [Attachment 1] No. 516, 517, Defendant A and the defense counsel asserted that the above money was not granted to the respective crimes listed in the [Attachment 1] No. B 516, 517, and that each of the above crimes was deposited in the accounts of Defendant B 10,000 won in the name of the victim BG around November 28, 2016 (No. 4 rights of investigation record No. 1210), Defendant B and the defense counsel’s defense counsel’s defense counsel’s defense counsel’s defense counsel’s defense counsel’s defense counsel’s defense counsel’s defense counsel’s defense counsel’s defense of the above crimes No. 971 through No. 570,00,000 among the two crimes No. 287 and No. 977 of this case’s defense counsel’s defense counsel’s defense counsel’s defense counsel’s defense counsel’s defense of the above crimes were not accepted.

D. As to each of the crimes listed in the annexed Table 1 Nos. 633 through 642, 644, and 646 to 654, Defendant A and the defense counsel asserts to the effect that the victim of the crimes listed in the annexed Table 1 Nos. 633 through 642, 644, and 646 to 654 is S business operator.

According to the aforementioned evidence: (a) the victim, at the investigation stage of B, and around February 2016, BI knew of B's work by introducing BJ, B's mother, B, and the victim's explanation about B's work; (b) the victim's explanation about B's work; and (c) the victim's statement to the effect that B's work was not a business operator, but an investor's investment; (d) the victim's statement to the effect that B's work was not a business operator; and (d) the victim's statement to the effect that B's work was not a business operator; and (e) the victim's statement to the effect that B's work was not a business operator's investment account; and (e) the victim's statement to the effect that B's investment account was not a business operator's investment account; and (e) the victim's statement to the effect that B's investment account was not a business operator's investment account; and (e) the victim's statement to the effect that it was not a business operator's other than the victim's statement.

In full view of the above circumstances, as stated in Paragraph (1) of the criminal facts in the judgment of the victim I, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant A and the defense counsel were arrested by the defendants and delivered each of the amounts listed in the annexed Table 633 through 642, 644, 646, and 654, as stated in the annexed Table 1 of Crimes No. 633 through 642, 64

2. Determination as to Defendant B and the defense counsel’s assertion

Defendant B and his defense counsel asserts to the effect that the crime of fraud and the act of fund-raising as listed in the annexed Table 20, 67, 167, 242 through 245, and 247 through 252 is an extension of the maturity of the existing investment without actually giving or receiving funds.

In cases where the money acquired through deception is treated as re-investment of money only from new injury without actually receiving funds, the amount of such re-investment shall be excluded from the sum of the amount acquired through deception (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Do7470, Jan. 25, 2007). However, according to the records of the detailed statement of S account (Evidence No. 42,58) in the above list of crimes, it is recognized that the money was actually deposited in the S AD bank account in the name of the relevant victim at each date indicated in the list of crimes No. 20,67, 167, 242 through 245, 247 through 252, since each of the above crimes is not treated as re-investment of money in the name of the relevant victim without actually receiving funds, the allegation in this part of the defendant B and the defense counsel cannot be accepted.

1. Reasons for sentencing: Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than three years but not more than 45 years;

2. Scope of recommendations according to the sentencing criteria ( common among the accused).

(a) Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud), each fraud;

[Determination of Punishment] Form 4 (not less than 5 billion won but less than 30 billion won)

[Special Convicts] Where the victim is fully responsible for the occurrence of a crime or the expansion of damage (affirmative) / Where the victim commits a crime against an unspecified or many unspecified victims or commits a crime repeatedly over a considerable period of time (aggravated factor)

[Recommendation and Scope of Recommendation] Basic Field, Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than four years, but not more than nine years (the sum of the amount of profit constitutes a case where a type is higher than that of a single crime as a result of the sum of the amount of profit, and thus 1/3 of the lowest limit of the amount of punishment

(b) Violation of the Act on the Regulation of Conducting Fund-Raising Business without Permission: The sentencing criteria is not set. The final recommendation type based on the standards for handling multiple crimes is not less than 4 years (the crime for which the sentencing criteria are set and the crime of violating the Act on the Regulation of Conducting Fund-Raising Business without Permission is in the concurrent relationship under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, taking into account

3. Determination of sentence;

All of the Defendants except for those who were sentenced to a fine for one kind of crime; the overall facts charged are recognized by all of the Defendants; the Defendants are divided by mistake; Defendant A does not establish S for the purpose of committing the instant crime from the beginning; Defendant A engaged in a normal image content business; Defendant B had been involved in the instant crime; Defendant A had been continuously engaged in the instant crime using part of the investment fund; Defendant A paid money to investors for the purpose of receiving money and interest; Defendant A did not have to take into account the fact that there is no specific criminal history; Defendant A did not have to take into account the fact that there was a need to obtain money from the victims; Defendant A did not have to take into account the fact that there was a considerable need to obtain money from the victims; Defendant A did not have been able to obtain money from the victims under the direction of the victims of the instant crime; Defendant B did not have to have been able to obtain money from the victims under the direction of the victims of the instant crime; Defendant B did not have to have been able to obtain money from the victims of the instant crime and to have been able to receive money from the victims.

[On the other hand, according to Article 32 (6) of the Act on Corporate Governance of Financial Companies, in cases where the Defendants are the largest shareholder among the largest shareholders of financial companies, the Defendants are subject to examination of eligibility under Article 32 (1), namely, the violation of the Act on the Regulation of Unauthorized Receipt of Securities and Subordinates under the finance-related Acts and subordinate statutes and the remaining facts charged, and the punishment shall be imposed separately. However, in this case, there is no evidence to confirm that the Defendants are subject to examination of eligibility.

The acquittal portion

1. Of the charges of violation of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) (hereinafter referred to as "Violation of the Act without Permission"), the respective amount listed in [Attachment 2] Nos. 102, 104 through 107 (Attached 75, 77 and 80; hereinafter referred to as "part 1 of the charges"), the respective amount listed in [Attachment 2] Nos. 263 and 193 and 264 [Attachment 6] Nos. 7-2, Nos. 9 and 5-2, Nos. 7 and 7-2, Nos. 67-2, Nos. 9 and 5-2, Nos. 67, Nos. 8 and 543, the same shall apply to [Attachment 6] of the above charges of violation of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (hereinafter referred to as "No. 2, No. 97-2, No.

A. The summary of the facts charged in this part 1 through 11. The Defendants (limited to the Defendant A), by deceiving the victim BF, BU, BV, BW, BG, BX (B), Q, AF, BY, BY, BB, and BP by the same method as the facts charged, and by deceiving the above victims, respectively, 102, 104 through 107, 263, 264, 343 (at least 75,77 through 80, 192, 193, 246; hereinafter the same shall apply), 419, 518, 519 (at least 20 days’ list of crimes), 50, 550 through 257, 298, 265 through 278, 298, 197, 257, 298 through 2785, 297, 196).

B. The portion that is not recognized to have been granted money

1) Determination of this part of the charges concerning victim BF

A) The objective financial data to recognize the fact that the Defendants were actually given the money listed in [Attachment 1] Nos. 102, 104, and 107 from the victim BF (attached Table 2 Nos. 75, 77, and 80) was not submitted to this court. The remaining evidence submitted by the Prosecutor alone is insufficient to deem that this part of the charges 1 is proven to the extent that the judge could not have a reasonable doubt.

B) If so, this part of the facts charged 1 constitutes a case where there is no proof of the facts charged, and thus, it should be pronounced not guilty under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act. However, as seen earlier, inasmuch as it is found guilty of the crime of fraud related to each of the money listed in [Attachment 1] Nos. 103 and 108, which are related to a single comprehensive crime (the same shall apply to [Attachment 2] and the crime of violation of the Act on Receipt of Similar and

2) Determination of this part of the facts charged in relation to the victim BV

A) The objective financial data to acknowledge that the Defendants actually received the money listed in [Attachment 1] No. 343 from the victim BV (attached Table 2 No. 246) was not submitted to this court. The remaining evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to deem that the facts charged in this part 3 is proven to the extent that the judges could avoid a reasonable doubt.

B) Thus, since this part of the facts charged in this part 3 constitutes a case where there is no proof of criminal facts, it is necessary to pronounce innocence pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act. However, inasmuch as it is found that each of the money listed in [Attachment 1] Nos. 339 through 342, 344 through 349 (Attached 242 through 245, 247 through 252) with regard to the crime of fraud and the violation of the Act on the Receipt of Similar Crimes, it is not separately acquitted in the disposition.

3) Determination of this part of the charges concerning the victim BG

A) The objective financial data to acknowledge that Defendant A was actually issued KRW 499,000,000,000, total of the amounts listed in [Attachment 1] Nos. 518, 519 on December 1, 2017 from the victim BG, was not submitted to this court. The remainder of the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor alone is insufficient to deem that this part of the facts charged was proven to the extent that the judge could not have any reasonable doubt.

Ultimately, the amount of profit that Defendant A acquired as a result of the crime committed against Victim BG is merely KRW 60,000,000, which is the aggregate of the amounts listed in [Attachment 1] List 516,517, which is found guilty of the above crime, and it is obvious that the amount of profit governed by Article 3(1)2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes is not less than KRW 500,00,000.

B) If so, among the facts charged in this part 5 and the part that violated the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes due to the fraud against the victim BG in this part, since there is no proof of criminal facts, it should be pronounced not guilty pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act. However, inasmuch as it is found guilty of the crime of fraud in attached Table 1 No. 516, 517, which is related to the comprehensive crime, the order does not separately pronounce innocence, and the part that violated the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes, among the facts charged in this part 5, is found guilty of the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc.

1) Determination as to this part of the facts charged in relation to the victim BU

A) Although the victim BU was found to have deposited each money listed in [Attachment 1] Nos. 263 and 264 in the AD bank account in the name of the defendant (attached Table 2, No. 192, 193; hereinafter the same shall apply), it is difficult to conclude that the facts charged against the defendant that the victim BU paid each of the above money in the name of investment deposit to the AD bank account in the name of the defendant, as shown in attached Table 1, No. 263 and No. 264 (attached Table 2, No. 192, and No. 193, No. 193) were not submitted as evidence to this court, and the remaining evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone are insufficient to support the judge that the victim BU paid the above money in the name of investment deposit to the SU to the extent that it

B) Therefore, since the facts charged in this part of the facts charged fall under the case where there is no proof of criminal facts, the fraudulent part of the facts charged in this part 2 shall be pronounced not guilty pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the summary of the judgment of innocence shall be publicly notified pursuant to Article 58(2) of the Criminal Act. However, as long as the part of the facts charged in this part 2 of the facts charged guilty of violating the Act on Receipt of Similar Crimes under Article 3 of the Criminal

2) Judgment on this part of the facts charged in relation to the victim B Q 7

A) Of the facts charged in this part 7, for each of the money listed in the [Attachment 1] Nos. 707, 711, 712, 714, and 719 (attached Table 2 No. 528, 532, 533, 535, and 540) among the facts charged, the fact that the victim Q deposited each of the above money into the AD Bank account in the name of SD Bank. However, there was no evidence submitted by the prosecutor to this court that there was an investment agreement between S such as investment agreement and the victim Q. The remaining evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is difficult to deem that the part of the facts charged that the above money was paid to the victim B Q was proved to have the judge excluded a reasonable doubt (i.e., the defendant or the defense counsel's assertion that each of the above money was individually lent from the victim B and Q.).

B) Of the facts charged in this part 7, with respect to each of the money listed in the [Attachment 1] Nos. 708 through 710, 713, 715 through 718, and 720 (attached Table 2, Nos. 529 through 531, 534, 536 through 539, and 541, the same shall apply) of the attached Table 1 Crimes List among the facts charged in this part 7, the Defendants or S was actually provided with the corresponding money from B Q. The objective financial data to acknowledge the fact was not submitted to this court. The remaining evidence submitted by the Prosecutor alone is difficult to view that the part of the facts charged that Q offered each of the above money to S for investment purpose is proven to the extent that the judge could not have a reasonable doubt

C) If so, since this part of the facts charged in this part of the 7 facts charged fall under the case where there is no proof of criminal facts, the part of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes due to fraud among the facts charged in this part 7 is pronounced not guilty pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the summary of the judgment of innocence pursuant to Article 58 (2) of the Criminal Act, but in this part of the facts charged in this part 7, the part of the violation of the

D. Determination as to the pertinent part of S’s business operator or executive officer (this part of the charges No. 4, 9, 11)

1) Defendant A and his defense counsel’s assertion

Since the victims BW, BY, and BP are both business operators of S, it cannot be deemed that the victims BW, BY, and BP were accused from the Defendants and remitted each of the money listed in [Attachment 1] Nos. 419, 881, and 882, respectively, to S, and each of the money listed in [Attachment 2] Nos. 659, 660, and 882 (hereinafter referred to as [Attachment 2] of the list of crimes, and each of the money listed in [Attachment 2] No. 953, 954, as [Attachment 2] of the list of crimes.

2) Relevant legal principles

It is difficult to readily conclude that a member of a similar fund-raising business entity, which is highly likely to commit a fraud by deceiving money in collusion with the accused charged despite the failure to institute a public prosecution as an accomplice in fraud, is a victim of fraud because it is difficult to readily conclude that another Defendants were subjected to deception and provided funds (see Supreme Court Decision 2016Do5871, Aug. 24, 2016).

3) Whether deception exists or not

In light of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence submitted by the prosecutor and the defense counsel of the Defendants, namely, the list of S business operators (Evidence No. 17), the name and the account number of the victim BW, BY, and BY on the account number list submitted by the Defendant at the investigation stage (Evidence No. 30), and the following facts: (a) the business operator in charge of the money listed in Attached Table 1 (Evidence No. 953, 954, 974) is indicated as the victim BP; and (b) the victim BP was disadvantageous to holding a director in S (Evidence No. 2393 of the Evidence No. 23), and (c) the Defendant also stated to the effect that the victim BY and BP was an executive officer of the victim BY and BP in this court, it is difficult to conclude that the victim BW from the Defendant, the victim BY, and the Defendants were deceiving each of the above facts charged by the prosecutor to exclude the remaining funds under the name of the judge.

4) Sub-committee

Therefore, since the facts charged in this part 4, 9, and 11 fall under the case where there is no proof of criminal facts, each part of the facts charged in this part 4, 9, and 11 is acquitted under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and under Article 58(2) of the Criminal Act, the summary of the judgment of innocence shall be publicly notified under Article 58(2) of the Criminal Act, and as long as the part of the facts charged in this part 4, 9, and 11 of the facts charged in violation of the Act on the Receipt of Similar Crimes under Article 3 of the Criminal

E. Determination on the charges of this part 6, 8, and 10 related to the victim BX (B), AF, and BB

1) According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, it is confirmed that the victim AF has remitted the money listed in [Attachment 1] Nos. 550 through 555 of [Attachment 2] to the S account; each of the money listed in [Attachment 2] Nos. 685 through 690 of the List of Offenses 550 to 555; hereinafter the same shall apply) to the victim AF; and the victim BB has made a statement to the effect that the victim and the business owner under the control of the victim B were accused of and invested in the S. at the investigation stage; and the victim BB has the money listed in [Attachment 2] Nos. 902 through 911 of the List of Offenses 1 (Attached 2 Crimes Nos. 675 through 6844; hereinafter the same shall apply) to the above victim B or the business owner under the control of the victim B by deceiving him/her.

2) However, according to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor and the defendants, the victim AF, an employee of the victim BB, established the following circumstances, i.e., ① around May 2016, upon request by the victim B to grant a loan from other investors, and came to know that the victim B was a company run in a kind of phone to receive investment funds from other investors and to redeem the principal and interest of the senior investors (the witness examination record of the AF, No. 7, No. 8), and ② The defendant B and U.S., from June 2016 to March 2017, respectively, established the victim BB and the loaned company (AB, CB, andCC) to the effect that they were aware of the fact that the above company was run in a way of having received investment funds from the investors, and the victim B and U.S. (the victim B were transferred to the victim B, and the victim B and U.S. 2 were transferred to the victim B, and the victim CB et al. were transferred to the victim B, the victim B’s 1 and the audit.

3) Comprehensively taking account of all the above circumstances, it is difficult to readily conclude that the victim BX (B), AF, and B were accused of the Defendants and UC and delivered each of the above money under the pretext of investment in S. In short, it is difficult to conclude that the remaining evidence, including the statement at the investigation stage of the victim BB, submitted by the prosecutor, alone, was proved to the extent that the facts charged in this part 6, 8, and 10 were proven to the extent that the judge could not have

4) If so, since the facts charged in this part 6, 8, and 10 fall under the case where there is no proof of criminal facts, each part of the facts charged in this part 6, 8, and 10 with respect to the victim BX (BB), AF, and BB (the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes by Fraud for the victim BX (B), BB, and fraud for the victim AF) shall be pronounced not guilty under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the summary of the judgment of each of the above innocence shall be publicly notified under Article 58(2) of the Criminal Act, but each part of the facts charged in this part 6, 8, and 10 guilty of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes in the judgment of the court below shall not be pronounced

2. Among the facts charged in violation of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) and the Act on the Receipt of Similar Crimes, the part of the money listed in the attached Table 1 (attached Table 2 Nos. 461, 462, 472, 474, 472, 482, 484 through 507) (hereinafter referred to as "part 12 prosecution") in the attached Table 1 list of crimes committed in violation of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud)

A. Summary of this part of the facts charged

The defendants deceiving the victim I by means of the same manner as the facts constituting the crime, and thereby deceiving the victim I, the amount listed in [Attachment 1] Nos. 632, 645, 664, 665, 671 from the victim I (attached Table 461, 474, 493, 494, 500; hereinafter referred to as "the amount" shall be referred to as "the amount"; hereinafter the same shall apply). The amount listed in [Attachment 2] Nos. 633 and 653 of the list of crimes (attached Table 2, No. 462, 482; hereinafter referred to as "the amount" shall be referred to as "the amount"; hereinafter the same shall apply); 1) the amount listed in the list of crimes Nos. 643 (attached Table 2, No. 472, No. 475, and 67) shall be omitted; 30 to 665,000.

B. The part (1) for which it is not recognized that the defendants or S has received the entire amount of the money (1) is not provided with objective financial data to acknowledge that they have received the money from the victim I among the charges 12 of this part (1). Since there is a lack to acknowledge this only with the remaining evidence submitted by the prosecutor, this part) the money should be excluded from the amount of defraudation related to the victim and the amount of the fund received in relation thereto. The part (2) not recognized as having received a part of the money (2) or the defendants or S have received a part of the money from the victim I of the investment amount (195,00,000,600,000 won, 60,000 won) stated in the same order (60,000,000 won, 300,000,000 won, 60,000 won, 30,000,000 won and 630,000,000 won and 30,00,00.

라. S에 대한 투자금인지 여부가 불분명한 부분(이 부분 ③ 금원) 피해자 가 2016. 11. 28, 주식회사 BZ 명의의 AD은행 계좌로 이 부분 ③ 금원을 송금한 사실은 인정되나, 피고인 B은 이 법정에 증인으로 출석하여 이 부분 ③ 금원 100,000,000원은 주식회사 BZ이 피해자 로부터 대여받은 금원으로 이를 S에 입금하지 아니하였다는 취지로 진술한 반면(피고인 B에 대한 증인신문 녹취서 제42면), 달리 투자약정서 등 S와 피해자 | 사이에 투자약정이 체결되었다고 인정할만한 자료가 제출되지 아니한 사정에 비추어, 피고인 B의 피해자 I에 대한 별개의 사기 또는 횡령 범죄의 성립 여부가 문제될 수 있음은 별론으로 하고 검사가 제출한 증거들만으로 피해자 가피고인들로부터 범죄사실 기재와 같이 기망당하여 S에 위 금원을 투자금으로 교부하였다고 인정하기에 부족하므로, 이 부분 ② 금원 또한 피해자 와 관련한 편취금액 및 이

shall be excluded from the amount received without delay.

D. The part at issue of deception or existence of causation (4)

1) According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, it is recognized that the victim transferred this part of the money to the AD bank account in the name of S and the AD bank account in the name of Defendant A between May 26, 2017 and September 22, 2017. The victim I stated that the victim I was accused of the Defendants or S and paid this part of the money consistently from the investigation stage to the investigation stage.

2) On the other hand, according to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor and the defendant Gap's defense counsel, the following facts were revealed to the effect that "the victim I returned investment funds from this court to May 2017." The victim I stated to the effect that "I was employed as the head of S, around September 2017, as I would be accurately known" (the victim's witness examination record No. 8, No. 22). At the investigation stage, the defendant B also explained to the effect that "the victim I was little of profits to the victim I and it is difficult to yield profits in the future as BB days. The victim was aware that BB was flick in the company, and that BB was to return investment funds from 0,000,0000 to 30,0000,0000,0000,0000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000) were made by the defendant 1 and 2,07,0.

3) Comprehensively taking account of the foregoing circumstances, at least BB’s request on May 26, 2017 for the return of investment funds to S, it is difficult to avoid the possibility of remitting this part of the funds to S for the purpose of receiving high interest rates, even though the victim was aware of the so-called S’s operation method of investment funds or business situation. Therefore, the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor alone is insufficient to deem that the victim was deprived of the Defendants or S and remitted this part of the funds.

E. Sub-committee

Therefore, it is difficult to view that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone that this part of the facts charged related to victim I (i.e., funds 1 to 4) was proved to the extent that the judge could avoid a reasonable doubt.

Therefore, among this part of the charges against the Defendants, the part of the amount in excess of the amount of each recognition should be pronounced not guilty on the grounds that the amount in excess of the amount of the 12 charges (as stated in attached Table 1 Nos. 632, 643, 645, 655 through 678 (as stated in attached Table 2 No. 461, 472, 474, 484 through 507) and the 2 of this case (as stated in attached Table 1 No. 633,653, 462, 482) constitutes a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (as stated in attached Table 2, No. 462, 482) and the 634 through 642, 6464, 652, 654, each of the above charges of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (as stated in attached Table 2, No. 36364 through 2754, 547).

The judge of the presiding judge shall be net;

Judges Choi Dong-hwan

Judges Kim Gin-han

1) Although Defendant BIBP, Q (BR), BS, and B were submitted to the agreement, the Prosecutor’s prosecution against the fraud part regarding BS was prosecuted.

In addition, as examined in the acquittal portion after the crime of this case, it is difficult to view BP and Q as the victim of the crime of this case, and BT, as the victim of the crime of this case was not guilty.

A person who has already recovered his investment fund before this case is at issue.

2) However, according to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor is as follows: AD bank account in the name of BG on June 29, 2016; KRW 85,000,000; and August 2016.

11. 80,000,000, 2016. 9. 13. 40,000,000€, 2016. 9. 30. 10,000,000€, 2016. 11. 28. 100,000,000, 2016.

12. 30.15,00,000 won, and KRW 20,000,000 on January 26, 2017 shall be deposited respectively, and it shall be deposited in the AD bank account under the name of S. BG in the name of BG.

4. 13,00,000,009, 2017, 31, 10,000,009, and 30,000,000 on June 16, 2017; 4,000 on August 25, 2017; and 15,00,000,009 on August 25, 2017; and 9,207

28. The fact that KRW 26,00,000 has been deposited respectively, and there exists an investment agreement corresponding to the details of the deposit and a certificate of deposit.

B. A prosecutor's Amendments to Bill of Indictment cannot be ruled out that there is no possibility that the Defendants may exercise their defense rights.

In the absence of an application, this Court does not decide ex officio whether a crime related to each of the above deposits is established.

section 30.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.