사기
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. In full view of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the court below found the defendant not guilty of the facts charged in this case, even though the defendant did not have the intent or ability to pay the price, and the defendant received the order by selling timber to the victim.
2. Determination
A. The summary of the facts charged is that Defendant A is a person operating C Office, and Defendant B is a person operating D Construction Office.
On June 23, 2014, the Defendants would pay the victim F the wood price by supplying the timber imported from Russia to the victim F in the logistics warehouse located in the wife E in the Gussia-si on June 23, 2014
“.....”
However, Defendant A defaulted 9,032,100 won in total for health insurance premiums from March 2003 to November 2018; Defendant A recommended that the Seoul Central District Court pay KRW 14,039,369 to G Co., Ltd. on December 30, 201 and failed to perform his/her obligation to pay the amount of KRW 14,039; on November 13, 2015, the Seoul East East District Court entered his/her debt in the list; on September 13, 2012, Defendant A failed to pay KRW 324,850 to Gangdong-gu for acquisition tax of KRW 324,850 until February 13, 2013; on June 13, 2014, Defendant A paid KRW 320,000 in total to Defendant C’s employees who failed to pay the amount of KRW 14,000 in total to the local government 20/36,014.