It is intended to lend KRW 10 million to meet KRW 10 million three days after three days without molding.

“.......”

However, there was no intention or ability to pay 10 million won after 3 days.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received from the victim the delivery of KRW 10 million from the seat, namely, from the victim.

2. In a judgment of conviction in a criminal trial, the conviction shall be based on evidence with probative value sufficient to confluence that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt. Unless such proof is given, the conviction cannot be rendered even if there is suspicion of guilt against the Defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do8675, Mar. 9, 2006). As evidence corresponding to the facts charged in the instant case, the victim’s statements and loan certificates are indicated in the police and court room.

However, the following circumstances are acknowledged based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, namely, the victim: (a) was directly the defendant of the check 10 million won because the defendant was required to borrow the passbook deposited in the amount of KRW 500 million from the bond company; and (b) the defendant prepared a loan certificate for this.

Although the witness made a statement "," in this court, "the defendant, witness, or victim created a passbook with a large amount of deposit, provided it to the necessary persons, and received fees in return, and even if this case also offered 20 billion won to a female with a nameless loan from the bond company, he/she promised 20 billion won to the defendant, witness, or victim.