The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (fact-finding) is that the Defendant, who is an individual entrepreneur who is not related to C, and is an employee, using the trade name called Daejeon Branch Co., Ltd. Co., Ltd., Ltd., and ordered F to operate the business, and ordered F to pay the victim E a down payment of 70,000 won of the down payment to install solar power generators within 3 months, which is not obliged to notify the victim E, and thus, it constitutes a crime of fraud. The judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.
2. The facts charged and the judgment of the court below
A. On January 29, 2010, the Defendant of the facts charged in the instant case stated that “The Defendant, in managing the Daejeon Branch Co., Ltd. Co., Ltd. C, the Defendant, through F, a business employee, at the victim E’s home located in the Gyeyang-si, Chungcheongnam-si, the main text of the instant case, “at least two months after the preparation of a solar power supply project contract.” Of the total construction cost of seven million won, 2 million won may be subsidized from Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam-do, and one million won may be supported by the support from the Gyeyang-do, and the down payment shall be changed first to seven million won after the formation of the solar power supply project.”
However, the fact is that C did not have a branch office with the defendant as the branch office, so C did not have any relationship between the defendant and C. The above solar power distribution project was determined by the designated entity, and even if the defendant received the money from the victim, the defendant did not have the intent or ability to make the solar power generation project desired by the victim by filing an application for solar power installation project.
Nevertheless, the Defendant, as above, by deceiving the victim, received 70,000 won as the down payment from the victim to the agricultural bank account in the name of the Defendant’s wife G.
B. The lower court’s judgment: (a) the Defendant is a solar house supervised by the Government.