The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

The application for compensation of this case is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant: (a) the representative director of the KH; and (b) around September 201, the representative of the victims (ju)G office located in the third floor of the International Building of Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, “G would raise the funds of KRW 4.25 billion necessary for the withdrawal of the bankruptcy of the K Foundation within 15 days to raise the funds of KRW 4.25 billion from 15 days to 1 month; and (c) the request for the necessary retainers is made.”

However, even if the defendant received a retainer from the victim, he did not have the intent or ability to raise funds.

Around September 19, 201, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, received KRW 50 million from the victim to a single bank head of H around September 19, 201.

2. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by this court based on the evidence duly adopted and examined, it is difficult to readily conclude that the Defendant deceivings the victim even though there was no intention or ability to raise funds from the beginning, on the grounds that there was no civil dispute over whether the Defendant is obligated to return all or part of the funds received under the pretext of advance payment, but circumstances suggesting that the Defendant had been carrying out considerable part of the advisory work agreed with the complainant, such as peeped.

① In order to take over the L Hospital site and buildings owned by the K Foundation, in which bankruptcy proceedings are underway, the complainant company, as well as the details of the contract, intended to acquire the above claim amounting to KRW 5 billion from M (a bankruptcy trustee of the bankrupt M Co., Ltd.) who held the above claim amounting to KRW 20 billion, and sought to procure KRW 4.25 billion out of the necessary funds. The complainant company was introduced with the Defendant that it is connected with the lending company through N, as it merely heard the answer that it is difficult to hear the possibility of the above financing while entering several bond business entities and inquiring about the possibility of the above financing. The complainant company was the Defendant.