2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is that the Defendant engaged in the miscellaneous retail business, such as clothes and cosmetics, and, in fact, entered into a sub-contract with the victim non-victim Mable Social Services Korea Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim Co., Ltd.”) on the part of a vehicle with the monthly interest of at least 2 billion won, even if he/she did not have the intent or ability to pay the installment. In fact, the Defendant was planning to provide funds by way of immediately sending the vehicle purchased through the installment contract to the lender immediately.

On August 16, 2013, when the Defendant entered into a sub-contract to drive a vehicle to employees of the victim company into a D Exclusive Market located in Gwangju Nam-gu, Gwangju, by deceiving him/her in a manner of making it possible to pay each month in good faith, and he/she entered into a sub-contract to pay KRW 1,181,311 per month with the above non-employee and then received delivery of one car of KRW 58,00,000 at the market price (hereinafter “automobile of this case”).

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

B. The lower court’s judgment 1) The intent of the crime of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of fraud, is to be determined by comprehensively taking account of the objective circumstances such as the financial history, environment, details and details of the crime before and after the crime, and the process of transaction execution, so long as the Defendant does not confession

There is room for a judge to have a reasonable doubt of conviction.