"2018 Highest 4738" was ordered by the Defendant on March 22, 2017 from the victim E, the owner of the business, to receive an order for additional advance payment for R-22, while the Defendant continued to receive an order for additional advance payment for R-22, while the Defendant received an order for advance payment from the Plaintiff E, the owner of the business, to receive an order for additional advance payment for R-222.

Accordingly, on March 27, 2017, the Defendant sent text messages to the effect that “The Defendant is keeping 36 copies of the R-22 order that received the advance payment from the victim at the same place of business. Moreover, the Defendant sent text messages to the effect that “The Defendant shall supply 19,900 won to one copy.”

However, if the Defendant received an order for advance payment under the pre-sale agreement by specifying the unit price and quantity in advance, or by pretending to secure it, it should be able to actually supply it at the time of the victim's request within a short period, but there was no intention to purchase and keep the above 144 advance payment or to secure the reservation by inserting the funds at the time of the request of the victim. As such, even though the amount should not be immediately stored or secured, the Defendant did not keep or manage the advance payment at all, but did not keep or manage the advance payment separately, but did not intend to consume it with the general business fund and personal fund. The Defendant did not have any intention or ability to reduce the amount of the advance payment normally under the circumstances where the financial obligation and the financial obligation of the customer due to the loan operation are gradually accumulated, and the obligation of the customer, including the victim, was accumulated, and there was no intention or ability to supply or return the advance payment.

The defendant deceivings the victim as above.