Defendant (Defendant) around May 2015, 2015, among the crimes, No. 1250 of the High Court Decision 2017, which was decided by the lower court.

Accordingly, only the defendant appealed against the above guilty portion as follows, and the prosecutor did not appeal against the acquittal portion of the above reasons.

In such a case, according to the indivisible principle of appeal, the part of innocence in the above reasoning is also remanded to the trial court. However, since the part of innocence in the above reason is already excluded from the object of attack and defense between the parties, it cannot be judged again by the court (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Do5014, Oct. 28, 2004). Accordingly, the conclusion of the judgment of the court below as to the part of innocence in the above reason is followed, and this court is not judged separately.

Summary of Reasons for appeal

A. Fact-misunderstanding 1) The Defendant’s fraud against the victim D (Seoul High Order 1250, 1250, the Defendant borrowed money from the victim to import the boats and actually imported the boats. Since the sales volume of the boats at the time was operating a company in the five domestic markets, the Defendant was deceiving the victim at the time or did not have the ability to repay.

shall not be deemed to exist.

B) The injured party D’s occupational embezzlement of 25 feet 1 and 2 employees’ 25 feet yachts, only sold 25 feet 1 to the Defendant, and intended to purchase other feet from the Defendant, and did not have the Defendant keep the above 25 feet 1 feet for certification, etc.

In addition, the victim made the defendant keep the proceeds for the purpose of appropriating the new amount to be purchased after selling 2 persons who are owned by the victim.

C) The victim’s occupational embezzlement of the victim’s camping car, etc. is the defendant to sell camping car.