A. On June 6, 2016, the Defendant made a false call to the victim B (year 42) who is Dong-gu, and concluded that “If the purchase price of materials necessary for Integian Corporation is short of KRW 50 million, the Defendant would pay the construction price by receiving the payment prior to September 2016, if the purchase price of materials is short of KRW 50 million.”

However, in fact, since the commencement of construction works ordered by the Defendant around April 2016 has been delayed for more than two months, it was unclear whether the construction works were carried out or not, while the overdue debts and loan debts exceed 30 million won, there was no intention or ability to repay within the agreed period even if the Defendant borrowed money from the victim due to no particular property or income.

On June 7, 2016, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, received KRW 50 million from the victim to the Cbank account in the name of the Defendant, under the pretext of the borrowed money.

B. On September 2016, the Defendant called the Victim B by phoneing the victim B on September 2016, stating that “The Defendant would pay in lieu of lending KRW 30,000,000 if the material cost necessary for the interior works is insufficient.”

However, in fact, since the commencement of construction works ordered by the Defendant around April 2016 has been delayed for more than two months, it is not clear whether the construction works have been carried out or not. On the other hand, while the delinquent taxes that occurred around April 2013 exceeded KRW 00,000, there was no specific property or income, and there was no intention or ability to pay within the agreed time limit even if it borrowed money from

Around October 12, 2016, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, received KRW 0,000 from the victim to the Cbank account under the name of the Defendant as the borrowed money.

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

2. The facts charged of the instant case are crimes falling under Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act, and Article 328(2) of the Criminal Act, which applies mutatis mutandis under Article 354 of the Criminal Act, requires a complaint in cases where the victim and the offender are relatives other than lineal blood relatives, spouse, relatives living together, family members living together, or their spouse.