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

1. On January 18, 2016, the Defendant presented the victim E, who was introduced as a buyer of curios at the office located in the Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Gwanak-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, as follows: “The Defendant collected curios for 30 years in the Republic of Korea, took a book for 30 years, went beyond experts, and does not have an appraisal document for the interior, and all of the curios owned by him is a good.” On January 18, 2016, the Defendant presented 8 points of the Defendant’s curios (Gams) held by the office of the foregoing D (Gams) (Dams (Gams) held by the Defendant at the office of the foregoing D (Gams), “Seo-dong, Go-dong, Go-dong, Go-dong, Go-dong, and Go-dong, 15 years in order to complete the operation of the Gams (Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Seoul Special Metropolitan City’s 15 years in order to use the Dams (Dams).).

On February 5, 2016, the Defendant displayed 4 points (i.e., “G” coffee specialty located in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and (ii) the Defendant’s curios owned by the Defendant to the victim (i.e., “c., during the Joseon Dynasty’s colonization of the operation of the black white shot),” “styles craft in the Joseon Dynasty’s early Joseon Dynasty,” “Saman’s colon”, and “the white shot shot shot shot shot shots in the Joseon Dynasty’s early Joseon Dynasty,” and (iii) around March 5, 2016, the Defendant sent the victim a list of the names and features of four points of the said curios(s) and the features of cultural heritage supplied by the State, and estimated prices of KRW 500,000 to KRW 2 billion to the victim’s mobile phone.

On April 7, 2016, the Defendant attempted to sell 18 billion won in total to the victim as if he had 12 points of the above curios ( household goods) to the victim in the daily house of “I” located in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Gangnam-gu.

However, there is no fact that the defendant received education on the appraisal of ancient art works, such as history and classology, from a reliable institution or school, and the defendant was not in possession of professional curios appraisal ability.