Each application for compensation filed by an applicant is dismissed.

On February 23, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to three years of imprisonment in Busan District Court for fraud, etc., and on December 22, 2013, the execution of the sentence was terminated at the Busan Detention House.

"2015 Highest 790"

1. Fraud against victim F;

A. On March 2014, the Defendant’s credit card payment fraud means that “A victim F is the actual owner of a building constructed on G in Yangsan-si, Yangsan-si, the actual owner of the building, and (a) H is operated within the said land owner. It does not exceed the amount of the loan granted only on the land at the time of the completion of the building. If the Defendant borrowed money from thener and would allow the credit card to use the credit card, he/she will use it for the approval of the construction cost and the cost of the material, and will repay both the money borrowed and the credit card payment by obtaining the bank loan after obtaining the permission of the completion of the building until the Haman-si until April 2014.” Accordingly, the Defendant would have borrowed money from the victim as a loan from the victim on April 4, 2014; KRW 15 million around August 4, 2014; KRW 5 million around the same month; and KRW 15 million around the same month, around the same year and around the same year.

5. Around 14.1, a sum of 6 million won and 41 million won was remitted to the Defendant’s account, and around that time, the victim received one copy of the victim’s national bank credit card, Nonghyup Bank, CT Bank credit card, and Japanese FC credit card, and used it for the settlement of goods and services worth 12.6 million won in total in Busan and Gyeongnam.

However, the Defendant did not have any particular property or import in the name of the Defendant, and the Defendant was not the owner of the above G land and the owner of the above ground building, and the Defendant was not the owner of the above G land, and the building constructed on the above ground upon entrustment of H was constructed differently from the design approval by the competent authority, and the Defendant was in a situation where it is difficult to know at the time that the construction completion permission was granted due to the lack of the design approval by the competent authority. Therefore, even if the Defendant borrowed money or lent credit cards from the victim, there was no intent

In the end, it is eventually.