[2012 Highest 487] Around August 23, 2012, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim C to purchase 32,00 liters per literer than general transit in front of the community credit cooperatives located in the public city B.

However, the defendant did not have the intention or ability to purchase the transit even if he received the money from the victim because he thought that he would repay his obligation with the transit payment.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received 52 million won as a transit payment from the victim, in other words, from the victim.

[2013Kadan51] On September 3, 2012, the Defendant stated that “The Defendant would send weekly oil without a mold to the Defendant, because there is no money due to the lack of 20,000 liter of non-data which is less than 100 won low compared to the market price, and 20,000 liter of gasoline 20,000 liter, so the Defendant did not purchase it.”

However, at the time of the fact, the Defendant was at least KRW 100 million, and there was almost no import. Since the Defendant was unable to repay the debt even the tank lorri vehicle operated by the Defendant, it was thought that it was used as debt repayment and cost of living even if he received money from the victim as oil price, and there was no intention or ability to supply oil to the victim.

Around September 3, 2012, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, transferred KRW 32,30,000 to the Defendant’s account as the transit price from the victim. On September 4, 2012, the Defendant received KRW 36,88,00 as the annual gasoline price, and acquired KRW 6,918,00 in cash in total.

Summary of Evidence

[2012 Highest 487]

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. The certificate of borrowing [the certificate of borrowing shall be 2013 Highest 51];

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. The details of remittance of the transit price of 30,000 won, and the name A; and