On March 2012, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim E’s office located in Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, stating that “If he/she lends money to the victim, he/she would be able to repay the money by the end of May 2012, the Defendant would be able to supply the non-commercial bridge for high-rise apartment to the apartment complex near the Busan subway F Station.”

However, there was no intention or ability to repay the amount even if the Defendant borrowed the amount from the victim due to the failure of his/her business operation, etc., and there was no other property or income.

The Defendant received KRW 80 million from the victim as the borrowed money on March 27, 2012, KRW 20 million on April 6, 2012, KRW 30 million on April 18, 2012, and KRW 5 million on May 8, 2012 from the victim to the agricultural bank account in the name of the Defendant, respectively.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's statement at the fourth trial date in court (a statement to the effect that he has borrowed money from the amount written in indictment);

1. Statement of E in the police interrogation protocol (second, second, and replacement) of the accused;

1. Statement of the police statement of E;

1. Investigation report (victim E telephone conversations);

1. Application of the provisions of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning account transactions and copies of deposit passbooks attached to a written complaint;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act by universal title with respect to the relevant criminal facts;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel merely borrowed money from the victim, and there is no fact of deceiving the victim as stated in the facts charged, and there was no intention of defraudation due to the means of satisfaction at the time of borrowing. However, the following specific circumstances acknowledged as a result of the investigation of evidence (in particular, the statement at the investigation stage of the victim E) by this court, and ① the company operating the victim's private bridge for high-rise apartment in the company operating the victim automatically.