The defendant around February 2013, at the victim D's office located in Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government around February 2, 2013, received construction payment from the owner of the building within the month when he borrowed the construction fund, and paid the interest and principal of 30% per annum.

‘Falsely speaking,’ and ‘E Fund lending contract with the victim’ was concluded.

However, in fact, the Defendant had a debt amounting to KRW 325 million, such as financial right obligations and bonds, and was in arrears with taxes equivalent to KRW 15 million, and even if the construction cost is paid by the owner, the Defendant did not have an intent or ability to repay the debt even if he received the loan from the damaged party, because he/she had to pay the construction cost and wages.

On February 27, 2013, the Defendant received KRW 50 million from the damaged party to the F account designated by the Defendant, and KRW 50 million from the same account on March 7, 2013, and received KRW 100 million in total as the borrowed money.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement of the defendant in the first trial record;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on the lending contract, process deed (certificate No. 252, 2013), transaction details of the Saemaul Treasury account under A, all of the registered matters, response to a request for investigation cooperation (G) documents, F's transaction details of the post office account, and application of the details of account transaction Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting the crime and Article 347 of the choice of punishment: Selection of imprisonment;