피고인은 2014. 7. 25. 경 서울 구로구 E에 있는 피해자 주식회사 F 사무실에서 피해자의 대표 G에게 “ 주꾸미 공소장에 기재된 ‘ 쭈꾸미’ 는 ‘ 주꾸미’ 의 잘못된 말이다.

The credit payment will be made until December 31, 2014 with the sales amount sold to the customer on the part of the State in which the credit is supplied.

It was suggested to the effect that the payment of the purchase price is not a problem at all, because all of the assets of the private company currently in operation as security, including the receivables receivable from the customer.

However, in fact, the Defendant was scheduled to preferentially use the above sales proceeds for the repayment of the existing debt and the operating expenses of the company. The substantial portion of the business assets provided to the representative of the victim as security was irrelevant to the Defendant, and there was little value of collateral, and there was no intention or ability to repay the proceeds in advance to the victim according to the agreement because there was no possible property or no particular hospitalization.

Accordingly, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim as above; and (b) obtained from the victim, a delivery of 5,632 gamblings worth KRW 167,70,00 at the market price around the 28th of the same month; (c) and (d) received a total of five times from January 14, 2015, a total of KRW 305,118,000 from the time to January 14, 2015.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement made by the witness G in the fourth public trial protocol;

1. A statement, etc.;

1. A fact-finding certificate;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on investigation reporting;

1. Determination as to the assertion by the Defendant and the defense counsel regarding the pertinent Article of the Criminal Act and Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act regarding criminal facts and the selection of punishment ( comprehensively including imprisonment)

1. The facts of trading with the victim and the fact that the payment was not fully paid when the purchase price was made. However, the sale price was not paid in time to the victim on the wind that the purchase price of the defendant sold is not recovered normally, and the original victim is fixed.