On November 27, 2013, the Defendant and F obtained a installment loan from Defendant E, a company operating the Defendant, and purchased HB-low passenger cars (hereinafter referred to as “the instant passenger car”), as if they would pay the loan from E, and at the time of the victim’s KB- Capital contract, the name of the victim is “Korea Telecommunications Co., Ltd.”

The second installment contract was concluded between the departments.

However, in fact, not purchasing the above vehicle in E, but purchasing the above vehicle with installment loans by F, but as F was difficult to obtain an automobile installment loan due to low credit rating, the Defendant applied for an installment loan to the victim by borrowing only the name of E corporation operated by the Defendant.

Ultimately, the Defendant, in collusion with F, received KRW 15,00,000 as a loan from the victim on November 17, 2013 from the victim, by deceiving the victim as above, and acquired it by fraud.

2. Determination

A. The burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial is to be borne by the prosecutor, and the conviction should be based on the evidence with probative value that leads a judge to believe that the facts charged are true enough to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no such evidence, even if there is doubt of guilt against the defendant (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Do9633, Nov. 11, 2010, etc.), it is inevitable to determine the interest of the defendant as the interest of the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do9633, Nov. 11, 2010).