However, since the salesroom in the building zone was possible only through the open bid, the salesroom in the building zone was uncertain at the time, as well as the financial standing of the company, so that the salesroom was made even if the contract deposit is received from the victim because the financial standing of the company is not good, or there was no intention or ability to return it.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, was transferred from the victim to the corporate bank account in the name of the said company in the aggregate of KRW 5 million on April 23, 2013, and KRW 50 million on April 24, 2013, under the pretext of the contract for the intermediary management in the Dong-dong Zone.

2. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined in this court, the defendant can be acknowledged as having received KRW 50 million from the victim by inducing the victim to make an investment in the promotion exhibition center of the railroad model (hereinafter "I") with H functions to be located in the Dong area. However, according to the evidence above, the following facts can be acknowledged, and in light of these facts, it is difficult to deem that I would have been able to open bid, and even if the defendant received the investment money related to I business from the victim after the conclusion of the contract, it is difficult to view that the defendant had no intent or ability to return the money even if he received the down payment from the victim at the time of the contract. Thus, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to deem that the defendant had the intent to return it to the victim.

There is an intention to acquire by fraud or to obtain by fraud from the accused.