사기
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the defendant did not deceiving the victim at the time of borrowing money from the victim, and had sufficient intent and ability to repay, but failed to repay the borrowed money due to failure of business, so the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of
2. The intent of the crime of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of the crime of fraud, shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the objective circumstances such as the Defendant’s financial history, environment, details of the crime, and the process of transaction before and after the crime, unless the Defendant makes a confession. The intent of the crime is not a conclusive intention but a dolusent intention
(See Supreme Court Decision 2007Do10416 Decided February 28, 2008). The following circumstances recognized by the court below based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do10416, Feb. 28, 2008). The victim, consistently in the investigative agency and the court of the court below, stated that the defendant lent money to the victim and received interest from him, and that the amount of such money is KRW 2-300,000,000,000,000,000,000 won was over, and the victim did not know that he borrowed money from the victim and would be 68,550,000,000 won. If the defendant knew that the above money would not be invested in the game room business, the victim did not know that there was a possibility of borrowing money from the victim. < Amended by Act No. 20120, Feb. 28, 2008>