Lending money shall be settled of the Boners and retirement allowances accrued in December.

In this case, it made a false statement to the effect that it would lend money.

However, the defendant was thought to use the money borrowed from the injured party due to gambling at the time, and in order to raise the gambling fund, the victim was also a person who borrowed money from many financial institutions and individuals in addition to the victim, and there was no intention or ability to repay the money even if he borrowed money from the injured party.

The Defendant received 17,00,000 won from the damaged person’s account (F) in the name of the Defendant’s wife, as the director’s expense, from the damaged person, and received 119,50,000 won in total from the damaged person on eight occasions from the time to December 18, 2010 as shown in the attached crime list.

2. Determination

A. The intent of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of fraud of relevant legal principles, should be determined by comprehensively taking into account the objective circumstances, such as the Defendant’s financial history, environment, content of the crime, and process of transaction before and after the crime unless the Defendant is led to the confession (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2005Do7481, Nov. 24, 2005; 2007Do10416, Feb. 28, 2008). Moreover, in a criminal trial, the conviction in a criminal trial should be based on evidence with probative value sufficient for a judge to have a reasonable doubt that the facts charged are true to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt. Therefore, if there is no evidence having such probative value, the conviction cannot be determined even if there is suspicion of guilt against the Defendant, which is a subjective element of the crime (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do10416, Feb. 28,