A. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant, through an airport of Korea, planned a gold typ distributor who exported the gold to Japan through the airport of Korea to d to take the gold typ with C as if he were to play a role of transporting him, and then to d to erop the gold typ distributor by taking the gold typ distributor’s gold typing by getting the said D to leave the Japanese airport first.

Defendant E, on April 2018 in accordance with the foregoing plan, sent the victim E to “Ya-gu Mag-gu Mag-gu Mag-gu Mag-gu Mag-gu” on the Internet Neber Mag-gu Mag-gu Mag-gu to Japan, with free air tickets and travel of gold from Incheon airport to Japan.

The phrase “I amba with the victim’s contact to the victim,” and the word “I amba with the transport of gold bars.”

“The purport was to the effect that “.....”

However, according to the above plan, the defendant was thought that the leader was deducted.

On April 19, 2018, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim; (b) obtained from the injured party; (c) obtained 8kgg of gold bars equivalent to KRW 400 million at the Incheon International Airport Tax-Free Hotel located in the Jung-gu Incheon International Airport Tax-Free Zone (272) from the damage victim; and (d) obtained the delivery to the said C.

B. The Defendant’s assertion and determination 1) The summary of the Defendant’s assertion showed that, with F’s aid, the Defendant was unaware of the fact that he worn a dub in the dub, but the dub was attached to the dub inside the dub, and that the dub was caused by uneasiness and fear of tort.

Since it was only abandoned in an international airport toilet, there is no intention to acquire the leader from the victim, and this act of the defendant does not constitute a disposal act of fraud.

2) Determination A) In the relevant legal doctrine, a disposal act is intended to connect the final outcome of the actor’s mistake by deception and the acquisition of property or profits from property by the actor, etc. in the middle, while acquiring property by using the victim’s act, which is erroneous.