However, the Defendant did not have any property or income, and even if borrowing KRW 30 million from the victim, it was not possible to participate in the auction and obtain a successful bid. However, even if the Defendant borrowed the above money from the victim, the Defendant did not have any intention or ability to obtain an auction by using it, and did not have any intent or ability to receive an auction, even if the Defendant borrowed KRW 30 million from the victim, such as having no idea to use it as a private letter or a successful bid price.

The Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, received KRW 29,906,750 from the Korean bank account (Account Number: E) in the same day from the victim.

2. It is true that the Defendant was guilty on the ground that he did not have sufficient financial ability at the time even though the Defendant promised to return the borrowed money immediately after being awarded a non-conditional bid, and that he did not have been awarded a successful bid, and that he did not return most of the borrowed money.

However, the following circumstances, which are considered as a whole in light of the records, the defendant actually entered into a sales contract with F, who is the owner or owner, for the purpose of being awarded a successful bid, and paid 13 million won out of the borrowed money as a down payment after the successful bid. The defendant participated in the auction procedure, but gave a higher price than the expected price.