A. On October 1, 2018, the Defendant: (a) found the victim C’s house located in Goung-gun, Goung-gun, Goung-gun; (b) stated that “gas was inspected” to the victim; and (c) made a false statement to the victim, “A gas inspection is conducted as if the gas was a person; and (d) as a kitchen, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim that “A gas scrap has broken down, and thus the gas scrap should be replaced.”

However, in fact, it was not necessary to replace gas bags because gas bags in the victim's house were not broken down and can be used normally, so there was no need to replace gas bags.

The Defendant, as above, by deceiving the victim as above, received 2.30,000 won in cash from the victim as the price for goods.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

B. The Defendant violated the Door-to-Door Sales, etc. Act is door-to-door salesman(s)D.

No door-to-door seller shall inform false or exaggerated facts, induce or trade with consumers by means of deceptive methods, or interfere with cancellation of an order or termination of a contract.

Nevertheless, the Defendant No. A.

the date, time, and place described in subsection (a).

In the same manner as described in the subsection, the victim was induced and traded by informing C of false facts and selling gas bags to C.

2. We examine whether the instant gas scrap is broken down or needs to be replaced.

The main evidence supporting this lies in the investigation report (verification of gas siren failure) and the witness E’s legal statement. However, the investigation report (verification of gas siren failure) is inadmissible, and E is not admissible at the time of the investigation, and E is a “self-defense is a gas seller, not a person who repairs the gas.” It is not a gas link to the actual gas, but only a police officer’s explanation.”