"2015 Highest 73"

1. The Defendant is a person who is engaged in the lease business of Ctels.

On April 21, 2012, the Defendant prepared a lease agreement with the victim D to lease the said officetel 503 from the leased office of approximately 15:00 on April 15, 2012 to the 24-month rental fee for the lease of the said officetel 503 to the 63 million won from all tax, and there is no problem because the deposit for lease on a deposit basis established by the E Co., Ltd. was already returned.

After the simple termination of the whole century, it was said that the deposit will be returned.

However, in fact, the Defendant did not return the deposit money to E Co., Ltd. and, on February 5, 2008, the registration of chonsegwon established by E Co., Ltd. was valid, while operating an officetel lease business by receiving the deposit money for lease from the lessee without any particular property and returning it to the previous lessee, the Defendant did not have any intention or ability to return the deposit money for lease even if the period of lease from the victim ends.

Ultimately, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, was immediately given the victim a delivery of KRW 62,70,000 as deposit money from the victim.

According to the accusation and the statement of deposit confirmation attached thereto, the victim D can only recognize the fact that he deposited KRW 300,000 into the account of the former tenant of Ctel 503 on March 25, 2012 as the down payment, and even according to all evidence submitted by the prosecutor, there is no evidence to prove that the victim D was deceiving from the defendant and paid the above KRW 300,000 to the defendant on April 21, 2012.

Ultimately, with respect to this part of the facts charged that the acquired money exceeds the above 62.7 million won and the above 300,000 won including the above 300,000 won, there is no proof of crime, and thus, it should be sentenced to not guilty according to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.