The lower court, based on the following circumstances: (a) the victim consistently stated the developments leading up to the failure of the victim to accept the instant mobile phone distribution; (b) in light of the content of the sales contract concluded between the Defendant and the victim; and (c) the details of the instant transaction alleged by the Defendant are difficult to believe for the reasons indicated in its reasoning; and (d) the Defendant would supply the instant transaction to the victim without intent or ability to supply the mobile phone with an interviewer and the distribution.

Degnating 4,846,00 won in total as the price for goods;

The decision was determined.

In light of the relevant legal principles and evidence, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the logical and empirical rules or by misapprehending the facts contrary to the logical and empirical rules, as alleged in the Defendant’s grounds of appeal.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.