A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

Punishment of the crime

1. From January 2012 to June 2016, the Defendant, in violation of the Act on the Regulation of Similar Receipt Acts and subordinate statutes, operated a financial investment business entity with the trade name “E” in the Seo-gu Incheon Metropolitan Government D apartment shopping mall from around January 2012 to around June 2016, by explaining the terms and conditions of a contract, stating that, if he/she invests money from investors F, he/she would create profits from stocks and fund investors, and pay 3% of the monthly investment amount in the form of interest on principal, and would make a return of principal if he/she speaks at around one month prior to the termination of the contract, he/she would make an investment amount of KRW 60,000,000,000 for shares, funds, etc. with the delivery of KRW 715,300,000,000 from investors in total in the same manner as in attached Table 1), he/she would receive and sell shares from a large number of and unspecified investors in the future, and would receive more investments or money.

2. On January 2, 2016, at the same place as Paragraph (1) of the same Article, the Defendant concluded a false statement to the effect that “If a person makes an investment in money, he/she shall pay 3% interest of the principal of the investment every month by making profits from investment in stocks and funds, and return the principal at any time on the face of the week in advance when he/she wishes to deduct the principal of the investment.”

However, in fact, from January 2012, the Defendant is not able to make a normal investment even if he received a new investment payment due to the fact that it was difficult to refund the principal and the payment of interest that was promised to the existing investors because it continued to have continued to trade shares and funds by attracting investment funds from many unspecified investors, and that it was difficult for the Defendant to pay the principal and interest. In addition, the Defendant was not able to make a normal investment even if he received a new investment payment due to the fact that it was difficult to refund the principal and the payment of interest.