Around November 9, 2009, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that the Defendant “E” office for the victim in Pyeongtaek-si Co., Ltd., and that the Defendant did not obtain a patent related to the manufacture of functional water purifiers, and that there was no funds to establish a factory and a corporation for the manufacture of water purifiers. Therefore, even if the Defendant received investments from the victim in relation to the manufacture and sale of water purifiers, even if he did not intend to make profits from the business or establish a corporation and have no ability or ability to make shares, the Defendant is engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling the functional water purifiers. However, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant would establish a corporation and give profits by making an investment in money to expand the business.”

Around November 9, 2009, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received KRW 30 million from the victim to the Agricultural Cooperative Deposit Account in the name of the Defendant and acquired it by deceiving the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's partial statement in the first protocol of trial;

1. Legal statement of witness D;

1. Each legal statement of witness F and G in part;

1. Each police officer's statement about D and G;

1. Cash investment contract;

1. Business plan;

1. A certificate of borrowing;

1. Relevant Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of punishment concerning facts constituting an offense subject to the statutes of the detailed statement of transactions: Determination of the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion

1. On November 9, 2009, the Defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the Defendant was running a business manufacturing and selling water purifiers at the time of receiving KRW 30 million from the victim, and that the Defendant had intention or ability to reduce the future earnings and shares, and thus, there was no criminal intent in fraud, and thus, the Defendant cannot be established in fraud.

2. Determination

A. The intent of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of the crime of fraud, is, insofar as the defendant does not make a confession, objective circumstances such as the defendant's financial history, environment, contents of the crime, and the process of transaction before and after the crime.