Defendant

The judgment of the court below against A shall be reversed.

Defendant

A 1-A. A. 1-W. W. L.W. 1-W. L.W.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstanding 1) Defendant A (the fraud) Company B (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) continued to engage in profit-making activities through the recruitment of members and the operation of shopping mall by selling products to its members and saving various expenses, such as personnel expenses, management expenses, public relations expenses, etc.

In addition, if one member pays 1,0140,000 won to the defendant company, it does not receive a fixed amount of salary every month, and if the member's performance is filled by his class, he would pay the class allowance by settling it on the basis of the performance of the lower group. It is only corresponding to the public relations expenses or advertising expenses of the general company.

As such, the Defendant had the intent or ability to pay points or class allowances promised through the shopping mall operation of the victim company at the time of receiving the credit card payment from the victims, and thereafter, the Defendant could not pay the said allowances due to the failure of investment in the Philippines company that the Defendant proceeded. Therefore, the Defendant did not have the intention of defraudation.

Nevertheless, the court below convicted the charged facts of this case, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts.

2) The Defendants (the Defendants’ violation of the Door-to-Door Sales Act) do not constitute “multi-stage sales business” as defined in Article 2(2)5 of the Door-to-Door Sales Act, because the Defendants subscribed to the sales commission at least two levels and do not pay money in the nature of support allowances.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that found all the facts charged of this case guilty is erroneous and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The punishment that the court below sentenced against the Defendants (in the case of Defendant A, 2 months of imprisonment with prison labor, 6 months of imprisonment with prison labor for the remaining crimes, and 10 million won in the case of the Defendant Company) is too unreasonable.

2...