Of the facts charged in the instant case, each fraud was committed on October 17, 2014 and September 4, 2015.

The defendant, along with the victim B, operated the "C (hereinafter "the company of this case") that mainly runs the main business of installing a wood hold and steel structure, and the victim performed internal management duties, and the defendant performed internal management duties and field management duties.

On May 4, 2016, the Defendant: (a) at the instant corporate office located in Bupyeong-gu Incheon, Bupyeong-gu, Incheon; (b) was not required to pay the construction cost; (c) was thought to return part of deposited money; (d) was concealed; (c) was made as if the victims were required to pay the amount of construction cost; and (d) made the victim’s false statement as if necessary for the completion of construction cost; (c) made the victim deposit KRW 15,00,000 into the E’s account, which is the customer; and (d) on the same day, deposited KRW 10,000,000 into the F’s account, KRW 3,750,000

As to the circumstances of the fraud stated in the facts charged, it shall be revised ex officio to the extent that it does not infringe on the defendant's right of defense.

In such a way, the Defendant, as well as deceiving the victim and deceiving the victim of KRW 13,750,00,00 from around that time to September 2017, received a total of KRW 35,050,000 from around six times as stated in [Attachment Table 3 to 8] from around that time.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness B and E;

1. Each loan certificate, copy of passbook, statement of transaction (E), textbook (E), organization of company accounts, statement of transaction (C), passbook photograph, message photograph, and message photographer’s defense counsel asserts that the money listed in No. 3 through No. 7 of the annexed crime list is merely based on personal transaction relationship between E and the defendant, and is not related to the victim or the company of this case. The money listed in No. 8 of the annexed crime No.8 was agreed to be repaid in the last salary, and the victim was sufficiently aware of the credit standing of the defendant, and thus, fraud is not acknowledged for the defendant.

However, this shall not apply.