When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

The defendant is a person who operated D Co., Ltd. in the window C of Changwon-si, and the victim E is a person who operates 'G' as an enterprise that manufactures works machinery and parts from F of the window F of Changwon-si.

On May 2014, the Defendant made a false statement that “The Defendant would make cash settlement within one month after the issuance of the tax invoice, if he delivers showers, which are parts of the instant goods, (hereinafter “instant goods”) at the office of the victim.”

However, even if the goods of this case are supplied, the Defendant did not have the intention or ability to pay the price.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, obtained a total of 24,695,00 won from June 9, 2014 to June 23, 2014 and acquired by deceptioning the victim by being supplied with parts of public machinery equivalent to KRW 24,695,00.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Determination as to the defendant and his/her defense counsel's assertion on the complaint, electronic tax invoice, specifications of supply transaction, investigation report (a certificate of closure of business and attachment of value-added tax base certificate), investigation report (suspectNE Evaluation Information Return)

1. The gist of the allegation is that the Defendant did not pay the amount to the victim due to extreme decline in sales, etc. and did not intend to deceive the victim.

2. The intent of the crime of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of the judgment of fraud, shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the objective circumstances, such as the Defendant’s financial history before and after the crime, the environment, the content of the crime, and the process of transaction execution

(1) The Defendant supplied the instant goods to H, and supplied the instant goods to the victim, and received approximately KRW 23 million from the victim to the victim, and the Defendant supplied the instant goods to the victim. In short, the Defendant supplied the instant goods to the victim. However, the Defendant supplied the instant goods to the victim. In short, the Defendant supplied the instant goods to the victim.