Nevertheless, the Defendant, as if he was merely a simple consigned production company and the Defendant had all rights, by deceiving the same drug company (hereinafter referred to as “victim company”) as he was in possession of all rights, acquired 2 billion won in return for the exclusive right to sell L in return for the exclusive right to sell.

Therefore, the court below's decision that did not recognize a crime of fraud merely because the damaged company was aware of the current status of joint patent related to L was erroneous and adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is the representative director of G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”), a hospital-related software development company (hereinafter “G”), and said, around July 12, 201, the Defendant falsely stated that “H and I, an employee of the victimized company, jointly hold L patent rights in G and K operated by J, but actually holds all rights, and K is merely an entrusted production company, and K is merely an entrusted production company. The victimized company is expected to transfer KRW 2 billion to M Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “M”), 100% in return for granting L’s domestic and overseas exclusive sales rights for 20 years.”

However, G is only a fact that K was transferred 50% of its patent right shares from K, but K was not a simple entrusted production business entity of G, and the defendant did not have the right to sell L's exclusive right for 20 years to the damaged company.

The Defendant, by deceiving the damaged company, received 2 billion won from the victimized company to the corporate bank account in M on July 29, 201, and received 15 million won from the national bank account in the name of the Defendant on the same day.