Of the facts charged in the instant case, the fraud against the victim D Co., Ltd. is acquitted.

On December 22, 2012, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim F, a real operator of E Co., Ltd., “D Co., Ltd. and talk with D Co., Ltd., and to the amount of money at the cost of cutting aggregate.”

However, even if the victim received the above money from the victim, there was no intention to use the aggregate as the cost of opening the aggregate, and it was thought that it was used for personal purposes such as remitting the money to the defendant's birth or spouse.

Nevertheless, as above, the defendant deceivings the victim as above, and acquired 15 million won from the victim as the price for the construction of the same day.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness G and F;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. Detailed statement of transactions of self-reliance deposits (investigative records 36-37 pages), results of transfer management;

1. Standard contract for construction works (investigative record, 2: 17 pages), standard contract for private construction works (investigative record, 2: 18 pages); and

1. A certificate (one copy of investigation record and 58 pages);

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a letter (in which investigation records are two sphere 20 pages);

1. The defendant and his defense counsel's assertion about the pertinent Article of the relevant criminal facts, Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act of the choice of punishment (Optional to Imprisonment) and the defendant and his defense counsel's assertion that the defendant tried to take out the remaining soil that he would have been in charge of the construction of the instant case, and that the money received from the victim F merely received money from the defendant and did not intend to receive and return the money to the defendant's share of the construction cost at the time of the completion of construction work, and did not intend to arbitrarily consume and acquire it by means of

The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by the evidence of the ruling, that is, the defendant also recognized that the victim received 15 million won from the victim and used it for personal purposes. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 2037, Feb. 2, 2007>