Of the facts charged in the instant case, the charge of fraud is acquitted. Of the facts charged in the instant case, it is against the Labor Standards Act.

Parts of innocence - "2017 Highest 2841"

1. Around August 2015, the Defendant stated that “A victim B, the Defendant’s office building manager of Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, is preparing a restaurant opening business called “D” in Dongdaemun-gu, and, when investing funds, would bring 25% of the shares of the above restaurant.”

However, a person who intends to substantially prepare the above restaurant opening business at the time was E/F, and the defendant will help E/F operate the restaurant later.

In other words, even if the victim did not have the authority or position to dispose of the shares in the restaurant and received money from the victim, he/she did not have the intention or ability to reduce the shares in the restaurant even though he/she did not receive money from the victim.

B. At the time, the Defendant was a person of bad credit standing due to tax delinquency, etc. at the time and did not have the intent or ability to complete the interior construction by inserting the money received from EF and the money received from the injured party into the above restaurant interior work, and was thought to have consumed by the Defendant’s personal living expenses.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, as seen above, received KRW 30 million from the injured party on September 4, 2015 from the injured party and acquired it by fraud.

2. Claims by the defendant and defense counsel;

A. The Defendant did not have any right to the D’s share of the D’ cafeteria opened to Dongdaemun-gu C (hereinafter “instant cafeteria”), and therefore, the Defendant would hold the instant cafeteria share to the victim.

There is no fact that the notice was given.

However, after the defendant helps the opening and operation of the restaurant business of this case, the defendant secured the franchise business right of "D" and only held some shares of the business right to the victim.

On the other hand, at the time of soliciting the victim's investment, it did not notify the details of the project, and it was merely the investment in the profitability business, and the method of distributing the profits.