The defendant is a person who manufactures and installs UPS (UPS) under the trade name (State) D in Spocheon-si.

Around October 23, 2013, the Defendant entered into a contract for delivery of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution of the distribution.

In the course of delivery of a documentary gift as above, the Defendant delivered, on December 30, 2013, to the victim, a promissory note with Korea bank (165 million won on July 30, 2014, the payment date), a promissory note with Korea bank (1627,000 won on January 9, 2014, and a promissory note with Korea bank (1627,000 won on May 30, 2014) and issued on April 21, 2014, a promissory note with Korea bank (120,000 won on April 21, 2014, and on September 30, 2014) with the attitude that the amount of the promissory note, such as the payment date, would be settled on the payment date.

However, prior to receiving the above delivery from the injured party, the defendant company was in excess of the liability, and the amount of the outstanding amount that was not received from the subcontractor was accumulated, and the financial situation was extremely bad, such as the employee's monthly wage, etc., so the defendant knew that even if the above bill was delivered as the price for the delivery, the amount of the bill may not be paid on the date for presentation.

Defendant: (a) deceiving the victim as above; (b) received the distribution of the money from the Defendant’s wife and children; (c) delivered the money received from the Defendant’s headquarters as debt repayment to the Defendant’s wife and children; and (d) the said bill was used as the operating expenses of the Defendant’s company, and was processed in default due to the shortage of deposit and the disposition of suspension of transaction.

In the end, the defendant deceivings the victim and takes 29 times.