An application for compensation by an applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

The Defendant is a person who operates a Cheongban clothes selling company under the trade name of Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government “D”.

On January 4, 2016, the Defendant, at the above “D” warehouse, told the victim B, who was found in order to purchase 20,000 won of the Cheongbain Ski for women who will export to Vietnam, to display the Cheongbain Cheongba in which the Cheongbain site for women's skiing is located, and to display the Cheongba for sampling, and “no problem is any problem in quality. There is no problem in the quality of the Cheongbain 20,00 head of the Cheongbaki for women's sake, such as this, is secured, and there is no problem in exporting to Vietnam before the Gu administration.”

However, in fact, the defendant was thought to supply approximately 20,00 punishment by mixing about 1,00 punishment for women's skiings, the rest of the punishment by mixing the strings of waste, sitts, packs, and swedens, and there was no intention or ability to sell 20,000 punishment for women's skiings as stated by the victim.

On January 5, 2016, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received 30 million won from the victim through the corporate bank account of the management bank in the name of the Defendant on the same day through the account of the management bank of the management bank in the name of the Defendant, and acquired it by fraud.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness B and G;

1. Each police statement concerning B and G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to certificates of details of transfer, and details of accounts for community credit cooperatives members;

1. Relevant Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of criminal punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Judgment on the assertion of the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 32(1)3 and (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings (the scope of compensation is not clear)

1. The summary of the argument is that the defendant did not deceiving the victim to sell the victim's skik's skik's Cheongba, etc. under the victim's confirmation, and most clothes supplied by the defendant to the victim were supplied to the victim, and there was no problem of sale.