However, the defendant did not have any property, there is no particular income, and there is no fact that the mine is taken over or the mine is operated, and because it is not a situation in which a financial institution can receive a loan from a financial institution, there was no intention and ability to repay money from the victim.

Ultimately, on November 5, 2013, the Defendant received KRW 30 million from the victim to the account in the name of foreign exchange bank in the name of the Defendant, a stock company, which was operated by the Defendant, as mining business funds, and received KRW 160 million from the same account on November 6, 2013 as mining contract funds.

In this respect, the Defendant acquired pecuniary benefits by deceiving the victim.

2. Determination

A. (1) Although the Defendant borrowed KRW 30 million from the victim D as mining business funds on November 5, 2013 on the part of the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion (1) on November 5, 2013, the Defendant did not receive a transfer of KRW 30 million from the victim D to the transfer of KRW 30 million out of the financial institution loans from the F Co., Ltd., and the Defendant received the mine deposit from the F Co., Ltd., and paid KRW 270 million out of the loans from the financial institution, and was planned to repay KRW 30 million to the victim D, but the Defendant did not pay KRW 160 million in time to the wind that transfers KRW 30 million, unlike the initial promise of the victim D. Thus, the Defendant did not have any criminal intent or fraud. Therefore, the Defendant did not have any criminal intent.

(2) Between the Defendant and the F Co., Ltd. that became aware of the victim D’s introduction, the part of KRW 160 million on November 6, 2013 deducted 10% of the commission from the financial institution.