On June 4, 2015, the Defendant concealed such fact and requested the above victim to transfer the brokerage fee to his account, even though the Defendant did not work as a brokerage assistant of the above real estate office from May 27, 2015, and did not have the right to receive the brokerage fee from the victim E (the remaining and the aged 40).

Around June 4, 2015, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim as above; (b) received money KRW 744,000 from the account in the name of the Defendant (F) around 19:42 on June 4, 2015, under the pretext of brokerage commission.

2. Determination

A. In the transactional relationship with respect to property rights, where it is evident in light of the empirical rule that one party would not notify the other party of any matter related to the transaction, thereby bringing about the effects of the transactional relationship or the performance of obligations, and bring about the risk of not securing claims under the contract, without notifying the other party of the transaction, and received property or pecuniary benefits from the other party without notifying the other party of the transaction, and the other party would not receive the notification of such circumstances, if he would have received the notification of such circumstances, he/she would have the duty to notify the other party of such circumstances in advance in accordance with the principle of good faith. The failure to notify the other party of the fact that he/she would have to be notified of the fact that he/she would have to inform it, thereby deceiving the other party of the fact that it constitutes fraud. However, there is no obligation to notify the other party of the reason that the effect of legal relationship does not affect the other party's right

In addition, it is a fraud.