Defendants publish the summary of the judgment of innocence.

1. Summary of the facts charged

A. Defendant A, from September 28, 2012 to May 10, 2013, the Defendant: (a) informed 26 customers, including mobile phone buyers E, of the Cheongdong-gu D6th floor of Cheongdong-gu, Cheongdong-gu, Cheongdong-gu, the one’s own business store; (b) informed 26 customers, “If a mobile phone is purchased, he will pay the remaining installments for the previous mobile phone and the new mobile phone via which the new mobile phone is opened,” while attracting customers, Defendant A deceiving the victim, the only fact that such payment agreement was made, by deceiving the victim, as if he/she had recruited a normal customer, and then, he/she received 15,054,500 won from the victim to receive fees from 26 mobile phone subscribers for the recruitment of 26 mobile phone subscribers.

B. From June 19, 2012 to October 15, 2012, Defendant B: (a) agreed to provide 51 customers, such as Cheongdong-gu, Cheongdong-gu, Cheongdong-gu, Cheongdong-gu, Cheongdong-gu, a mobile phone buyer G, with “If a mobile phone is purchased, he will make an installment payment for the previous mobile phone and the new mobile phone opening through the new mobile phone; and (b) enticed the victim, as if he had recruited such substitute payment agreements, by deceiving him as if he had recruited customers normally; and (c) received 33,60,94 won from the victim to receive the fee for the recruitment of 51 mobile phone subscribers.

2. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence adopted and examined by the court below, the evidence produced by the prosecutor alone was proven beyond reasonable doubt.

It is difficult to see it.

(1) The Telecom entered into an agency contract with LV LW and was in charge of attracting customers.

On June 10, 2012, the telecom, Inc., Ltd., entrusts the business of attracting customers (on June 10, 2012) to H (representative director) and Defendant B, and pays fees.