2. The crime of fraud under Article 347 of the Criminal Act is established by deceiving a third party, thereby acquiring property or pecuniary benefits from the defective intent resulting therefrom. The essence of the crime of fraud is to acquire property or pecuniary benefits from deception, thereby infringing on the other party’s property. Therefore, it does not require that the other party actually suffers pecuniary loss.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2003Do4914 Decided December 26, 2003, etc.). According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the facts of May 25, 2008 are as follows: although most of the machinery was entered into and cannot be provided as security by our Capital and Lease Contracts, it can be acknowledged that the acquisition by deceiving the victim F to offer the said machinery as security, thereby allowing the Defendant to pay KRW 300 million to the Defendant’s obligor with the contract deposit. Thus, the Defendant is guilty.

On the other hand, according to the records, I paid KRW 100 million to F on January 2009, and brought part of the above machinery that the Defendant offered as security, and F, around May 2009, agreed that if F pays rent for the above machinery on behalf of F and paid the rent in full, F shall acquire ownership of the above machinery. According to the above facts of recognition, it may be deemed that F did not actually incur loss. However, in light of the above legal principles, it may be deemed that F did not have actual loss. However, by deceiving the Defendant to acquire profits in light of the above legal principles, fraud is established, and actual damage to F.