Nevertheless, the defendant made a false statement to the victim C at the time of the above day stating that "I lend 38 million won to the victim in one month when I lend money."

Around June 23, 2015, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received 10 million won from the victim to the Agricultural Cooperative Account (D) in the name of the Defendant, and acquired 28 million won from the same account around June 24, 2015, respectively as the borrowed money.

2. Determination:

A. The criminal intent of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of fraud, should be determined by comprehensively taking into account the objective circumstances such as the Defendant’s financial history, environment, content of the crime, process of transaction, and relationship with the victim before and after the crime unless the Defendant is led to the confession (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2004Do74, May 14, 2004; 2006Do8418, Apr. 27, 2007). If the injured person was aware of the Defendant’s credit standing and anticipated or could have anticipated the risk of delay in repayment or impossibility of repayment in the future, barring any circumstances such as the Defendant’s intent of repayment in the body, ability to defend, transaction conditions, etc., and the fact that the Defendant was unaware of important matters that could make a decision on whether to make a transaction, such as the Defendant’s ability of repayment, and the fact that the Defendant was unable to fully repay thereafter.

In full view of the following circumstances recognized by the records of this case, the evidence submitted by the prosecution alone shall be deemed to constitute fraud. (b) In full view of the following circumstances, the crime of fraud shall be committed against the Defendant. < Amended by Act No. 11851, Apr. 28, 2016; Act No. 11851, Jun. 9, 2016; Act No. 11835, Apr. 28, 2016; Act No. 11855, Mar