In a case where a victim with a master's degree in basic medical science was deceived by a diet company's false and misleading claims, Han Byul Heo advised that the victim's expertise should not be viewed as a mere show of qualifications, but rather as a supplement to explain how the claims were not scientifically based or used in a way that was not in accordance with the authorized purpose. Instead, use the expertise as a supplement to explain why the statements were not scientifically based or used in a different way than the purpose of the authorization.

In particular, if there is a suspicion that a device or procedure is not approved for the purpose of dieting, present it as evidence, and connect the circumstantial evidence such as advertisements, brochures, and letters with the company's refusal to provide information to logically organize the causal chain of deception (misrepresentation), mistake (misunderstanding), and disposition (contract and payment).