2. Determination

A. The judgment of the court below held that the defendant could not be deemed to have received clothes by deceiving the defendant with the intent to obtain mincing clothes from E when the defendant purchased mincing clothes from E, in light of the circumstances where the defendant purchased clothes from the spring in 2002 to 203 and the defendant has long been fully paid the amount in several ways, and the defendant has paid the amount in several ways, regardless of whether the amount of credit still not paid to E remains or there is a civil obligation to pay mincing clothes, when the defendant purchased mincing clothes from E, it is difficult to view that the defendant had received clothes by deceiving the defendant with the intent to obtain minc clothes from E at the time of the purchase of minc clothes from E.

B. (1) The decision of the party deliberation (1) on the crime of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of the relevant legal fraud, has to be made by comprehensively taking into account the objective circumstances such as the Defendant’s financial history, environment, details of the crime, and the process of performing transactions before and after the crime, insofar as the Defendant does not make a confession. In the transaction of goods, the establishment of fraud by defraudation shall be determined by whether there was an intention or ability to pay the price of goods to the Defendant as at the time of the transaction, even though there was no intention or ability to pay the price of goods to the victim as at the time of the transaction. As such, it shall be determined by whether there was an intention or ability to obtain