The Case
From a chance meeting in Bucharest to a decade-old paper trail
This investigation began with a single question from an investor who lost €40,000 to a
self-described tech entrepreneur named Kasun Süß. That question — "who is this person,
really?" — uncovered a pattern stretching back to 2016, spanning four countries, at least four
shell companies, and a constellation of associates whose roles blur the line between victim and
accomplice.
The materials assembled here are drawn exclusively from public records: commercial register
filings from Amtsgericht Augsburg (HRB 31412, HRB 34342, HRB 748464, HRB 770809), the Polish
KRS register (KRS 0001024599), WHOIS domain registration records, court garnishment orders,
and a detailed chronology compiled by the investor and two other affected women for the
Kriminalpolizei Augsburg (filed July 2026). Where a claim could not be independently verified,
it is labeled as such. Nothing in this report has been sourced from non-public or private
materials.
Two individuals sit at the center of this network. The first, Kasun Süß (born 9 June 1992 in
Germany), serves as the frontman — the charismatic recruiter who meets investors in person,
paints visions of billion-dollar exits, and never signs a single contract himself. The second,
Oleksandr Men, operates the corporate machinery: every investment agreement bears his
signature, routed through a Polish limited liability company (sp. z o.o.) and a German GmbH
that was renamed and restructured weeks before the first contract was signed. A third figure,
Sabrina Stängle, began as an apparent victim before the investigation revealed she had
knowledge of the deception from the outset. Additional leads — including a new entity,
Valkenstein GmbH (Stuttgart, HRB 770809), and an individual named Luis Filipe Monteiro Soares
(Berlin) — are under active review.
The investigation also documents the experiences of named victims, including Liane
Bamminger-Wöbbeking, who reports losses of €60,000 from the 2016–2017 Stilino GmbH era, and
two additional investors identified in the police filing. The
side-by-side comparison condenses the operational
differences between the two principals; the narrative sections that follow lay out the
timeline in full.