The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty, and the summary of the above judgment is publicly notified.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A victim E is merely an investment made in a situation where the defendant was aware of all the financial matters of the defendant, and the defendant did not have the intent to deceive or deception the victim, but the court below erred by misapprehending the fact, thereby convicted the defendant.

Judgment

At around 17:00 on August 7, 2009, the Defendant stated that “The Defendant would pay KRW 1,500,000,000 per month of the investment revenue by expanding the private teaching institute’s business and raising the number of students in the future, as there are more than 40 students operating the private teaching institute, and there is a possibility that the number of students may increase in the future.”

However, the Defendant, as a bad credit holder, was unable to pay the purchase price of the Private Institutes Advertising Complex, was unable to receive an investment payment from F and G, and there was no intention or ability to pay the investment return even if the Defendant received the investment payment from the victim, such as the lending of unreasonable money from others without any particular property and the punishment of the withdrawal business.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, obtained 30 million won as investment money from the victim in the same place, and obtained it from the victim.

The lower court found the Defendant guilty by taking account of the evidence presented in its judgment.

In light of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, the following facts can be acknowledged.

E, while having interest in the investment of private teaching institutes, became aware of the Dental Institute operated by the Defendant in Daegu through the web page of “M”, and became only the Defendant through N of the above Internet web site operator.

The defendant in Daegu C.