However, at the time, the Defendant had approximately KRW 1.8 million monthly average income, consumed approximately KRW 1.2 million in the cost of living, and had a debt of KRW 1.5 million, and even if he received the aforementioned prepaid payment from the victim, he did not have an intention or ability to repay it within a month.

As above, the Defendant deceivings the victim and received 4 million won as a prepaid payment from the victim.

2. The key issue of the instant case is whether or not the Defendant was the victim’s intent.

Although there are many criminal records of frauds in the same case, the following reasons have significances on the facts charged.

Examining the Defendant’s legal statement, the entry of the Defendant’s pocket book (a copy of No. 1’s book), and the witness F’s legal statement, D paid prepaid money in the intent that D would work for the Defendant and recover prepaid money from its revenue, and the Defendant was working at D’s business establishment for five months in fact, and it is believed that he did not have paid prepaid money as a commercial sex acts file, separate from the preserving balance (tentative name table table table, time table).

As such, D bears testimony that “I do not have any fact that I would like to pay prepaid money on his work, and I would not have caused F F to undermine the health certificate by doing so. I have received directly a health certificate. I have brought about it.”

On the other hand, the defendant stated that "no health certificate has been issued once, and due to the occurrence of a sexual disease, no health certificate was issued, and D knew of this, and the testimony of F is also issued."