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

1. On April 2013, the Defendant stated in the instant facts charged that “The Defendant, at a coffee shop located in Snish-dong, tried to initiate LED electronic display and newspaper advertising business with the trade name of LED electronic sign board and newspaper advertising business in the summer-dong area, and, if investing money, may give profits not less than three times the investment amount within one year.”

However, since the defendant had a debt equivalent to KRW 600 million at the time, he thought that he would use it to repay the debt even if he received the investment money from the victim, and did not have the intention or ability to conduct the LED electronic sign board and newspaper advertising business.

Around April 22, 2013, the Defendant received KRW 15 million from the victim to the national bank account in the name of the Defendant, and obtained KRW 50 million from around that time to May 2013, and obtained KRW 51.5 million in total on five occasions, such as the list of crimes, from around that time to around May 2013.

2. Determination

A. The victim stated that at the time of investment in each of the instant case, the victim made an investment by hearing an explanation from the Defendant that “at least three times the amount of investment may be received within one year” from the Defendant at the time of investment, relatively consistent from the investigative agency to the present court.

However, at the time of the instant investment, D, upon introducing the Defendant from the victim and making investments with the victim, stated in this Court that “The specific amount of profits, such as three times the amount of investments made by the victim or the Defendant prior to the investment, is not written.” The agreement on each of the above investment specifies only the distribution ratio of profits generated from the advertising agency business, but does not specify the specific amount of revenue as alleged by the victim.

B. Meanwhile, according to the record, the Defendant is recognized as having been in excess of his/her obligation, such as bearing the obligation equivalent to KRW 500 million at the time of each of the instant investments.