Defendant shall be punished by a fine of three million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, at around April 30, 2015, from “C” located in Chungcheongnam-gun B, Chungcheong-gun B, he/she is the head of the E company, and he/she is the head of the E company, and when he/she is in charge of the investment, he/she will pay 5% of the investment profits every month by investing in the company account.

The phrase “ makes a false statement.”

However, in fact, even if the Defendant received investment from the injured party, the Defendant was scheduled to use it as a “return prevention” for the return of investment funds to the previous FF investors, etc. and for the payment of profits, and thus there was no intention or ability to pay 5% monthly profits as agreed upon by the injured party by normally making overseas futures investment through the said E.

The Defendant received from the injured party a transfer of KRW 10 million to G bank account (H) in the name of the Defendant on the same day.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. Public inspection of suspect interrogation records No. 82305 of the Incheon District Public Prosecutor's Office 2016 punishment;

1. The defendant asserts that he/she was aware of the transaction statement No. 2016 type No. 82305 of the Incheon District Public Prosecutor's Office [the defendant merely stated that the victim was aware of the victim's explanation from I and invested 10 million won to the defendant, and that the defendant did not deceiving the victim.

However, the witness D, before making payment of KRW 10 million to the victim's children in this Court, the defendant would give KRW 500,000 to the victim's children several times in each month.

A direct statement was made in finitely.

Before receiving KRW 10 million from the injured party, the Defendant seems to have already paid money from J and K to L with the money received from J and K, etc.

The Defendant’s gift account does not have any material to verify how the deposit amount is, how profit is, and what degree of profit is, and there was no material to verify whether the amount of profit is, at the time of the instant case, the F investors, their families, and their debts were reasonable at the time of the instant case, and even after the instant case, there was a “return” continuing to pay the debt with another person’s money.