The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty, and the summary of the judgment of innocence is publicly notified.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant agreed to pay the construction cost directly to the re-subcontracting company when he/she receives a subcontract for the construction work from the Cheong Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Cheonge Co., Ltd.”).

Therefore, if the victim D, who received a sub-subcontract from the Defendant, filed a claim for the construction cost with documents attached thereto, it cannot be said that the Defendant had the intention to acquire the re-subcontract construction cost.

2. Determination

A. On November 2011, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant would pay KRW 8.5 million construction cost as the completion of the construction work at the E-corporate office operated by the victim D in Gwangju Northern-gu, Gwangju, to the effect that “F University Handing Works, etc. will be paid as the construction work is completed.”

However, the Defendant had no intention or ability to pay the construction cost even if the Defendant had been able to perform the Flux construction work, because the Defendant had a total of about KRW 70,000,000,000 or more than KRW 80,000,00,000, such as the unpaid construction cost and wage.

Although the Defendant deceiving the victim as such and completed the above construction work around November 201, the Defendant acquired the same amount of property benefits by failing to pay KRW 8.5 million to the victim, even though the victim was unaware of the victim.

B. The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court and the first instance court’s duly adopted and investigated evidence: (i) N Construction and O Construction contracted for news report maintenance works and excellent construction works among F college PP pipes construction works, and subcontracted them to the public good; (ii) the Defendant re-subcontracted the said construction works to H run by the Defendant; and (iii) the Defendant agreed to directly pay the construction cost corresponding to the re-subcontract to the re-subcontract to the public good if he/she re-subcontracts a part of the process by receiving a subcontract for news report maintenance works and excellent construction works from public good; and (iv) the Defendant received the subcontract.