Whether a person has the intent or ability to repay money in the case of borrowing money by pretending that person has the intention or ability to repay, or not.

In the civil monetary lending relationship, it is impossible to recognize the criminal intent of acquiring the borrowed money immediately with the default of the obligation, but in the case of borrowing the money by pretending to repay the money as if the defendant did not have the intention of full repayment or did not have the ability to repay within the due date as promised at the time of the loan, the criminal intent of acquiring it can

Article 347 of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Hong Hong-soo

Daejeon District Court Decision 82No527 delivered on March 16, 1983

The appeal is dismissed.

Defendant’s defense counsel’s grounds of appeal

Examining each evidence cited by the court below in light of the records, it is clear that the court below rejected each part of the testimony of the court below, which conflict with the facts of the judgment, from among the testimony of the court below, the defendant's new scarcity, the same leukum, the same leukum, the same leukum, and the so-called leukum, and so on, the court below's finding the facts of the crime against the defendant's own interest. Thus, there is no violation of the rules of evidence due to incomplete deliberation or the reasons for violation of the rules of evidence, such as the theory

It is the theory of the lawsuit that it is impossible to recognize the criminal intent of acquiring the borrowed money immediately with the non-performance of the obligation in the civil monetary lending relationship. However, in the case of the borrowed money in which the defendant borrowed the money as if he did not have the intention of full repayment or did not have the ability to repay within the due date as promised in this case, it is sufficient to recognize the criminal intent of acquiring the borrowed money.

Ultimately, the appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Lee Lee Sung-soo (Presiding Justice)