The application of this case by the applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

On May 19, 2010, the Defendant concluded that “The Defendant would deliver construction materials, such as copoppy, poppy, etc., to the victim at the construction site of an apartment site at the time of residing in Gyeonggi-si, the Defendant would pay the victim in cash for the following month.”

However, at the time, the Defendant was liable for the amount of KRW 850,000,000,000, such as loans to Seongdong Credit Union, obligations to E, and construction material costs to the Seocho Industrial Co., Ltd., but on the contrary, the market price was equivalent to KRW 600,000,000, and there was no specific assets other than the F land and factory buildings of the amount of KRW 600,000,000, and there was no ability

The Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim as such, received construction materials from the victim from May 19, 2010 to June 7, 2010, including copoppy poppy, work site, and spoppy equivalent to the total market value of KRW 53,908,350, five times from May 19, 201.

Summary of Evidence

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. The police statement concerning B;

1. A copy of payment order, a copy of tax invoice, a copy of decision, a copy of acceptance certificate, or a copy of transaction agreement;

1. A copy of an investigation report (a copy of a pledge note), or a copy of a promissory note;

1. Two copies of the investigation report (a copy of the register of tampin factory owned by the suspect), and the register of real estate;

1. An investigation report (the details of creation and seizure of security rights of the tampin factory);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to data concerning investigation reports (verification of the result of auction), search results of court auction cases, and Internet auction cases;

1. Relevant laws concerning criminal facts and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act (Selection of Imprisonment: Reasons for rejecting an order for compensation: The victim seems to have received an order for payment, which is an executive title, to the defendant under the name of G, who is the name of the business operator, and it is deemed that there is no benefit in the order for compensation) of the reasons for sentencing, the age, character and behavior, the details and details