On December 2, 2009, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim’s house located in Sinnam-si, Sinnam-si, that “I would sell a house owned by N, N, N, N, N, N, N, N, N, N, N, N, N, P, N, N, N, P, N, N, P, N, P, N, N, P, P, N, P, P, N, P, P, N, P, P, P, P, N, P, N,

However, the defendant purchases studio even if he receives money from the victim.

There was no intention or ability to make the real estate so purchased in the name of the victim.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 20 million from the victim, via the Nonghyup Bank (G) account in the name of the victim used by the Defendant, KRW 90 million on December 11, 2009, KRW 90 million on January 4, 2009, and KRW 19 million on January 12, 2010, respectively, and received KRW 10,000 on March 2, 2010, KRW 10,000 on KRW 10,000 on KRW 10,000, KRW 2 and KRW 5 million on KRW 4 million on March 4, 2010, respectively.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

2. The Defendant alleged that he did not deceiving the victim as stated in the facts charged, and the money recorded in the facts charged was paid by the victim to F who is the Defendant’s imprisonment.

3. Determination

A. The burden of proving the criminal facts prosecuted in a criminal trial is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction of guilt is to be based on the evidence of probative value that leads a judge to the conviction that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, the suspicion of guilt is between the defendant, even if there is no such evidence.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

B. (See, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Do2823, Aug. 21, 2001).

Evidence corresponding to the facts charged in the instant case is as follows.