1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 35,80,000 and interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from August 31, 2017 to the day of complete payment.

1. The Defendant operated a C business entity as follows:

In other words, two members who have paid KRW 17,90,00 were introduced, and two members were introduced again, and two of them were admitted again (i.e., 7 members who have paid KRW 17,000,000,000, which is similar to the vehicle system in which the highest number of members was 68,000 won, out of 7,160,000 won paid by 4 members at the lowest level, and the vehicle purchase by proxy of the highest number of members was operated.

The defendant announced that it is possible for the insured to refund at any time.

The Defendant: (a) around September 25, 2015; (b) around October 6, 2015; and (c) around October 23, 2015; (b) KRW 71.6 million in total; (c) around October 23, 2015; (d) KRW 17.9 million in total; (d) KRW 17.9 million in total; and (e) KRW 17.9 million in total; and (e) KRW 17.9 million in total, around November 24, 2015; and (e) KRW 17.9 million in total, around December 22, 2015.

On April 5, 2017, the Defendant was found guilty on the ground that the Defendant, even though it was in a structure that could not make a refund to the subscribers through the aforementioned joint purchase agreement, etc., was guilty on the ground that he/she deceivings the subscribers by deceiving money as if the refund could be made

(The grounds for recognition are currently pending in the Supreme Court after the appeal by the defendant B). [The grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, the entry (including the serial number) of the evidence of subparagraphs A1 through 7, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. Determination

A. As seen earlier prior to the establishment of the liability for damages, C, operated by the Defendant, is a structure that collects subordinate membership fees from the lower insured and uses them as financial resources, such as purchase price of higher-

In order to make a refund through a change in the name of the existing subscriber, a new member's subscription (or a new member's subscription) should be premised, but since the number of motor vehicle buyers is limited, it is impossible to make a refund through a change in the name.

Nevertheless, the defendant, as the plaintiff, D and E could be refunded at any time, entered into a joint purchase contract by deceiving the plaintiff, D and E to receive money.