The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, according to the summary of the grounds for appeal, the defendant did not notify the victim E of his/her intent and ability to pay the purchase price due to deepening the liabilities of the D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) operated by himself/herself, and acquired the rubber products necessary for the 63 passengers aboard from the F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”) to supply the rubber products necessary for the 63 passengers aboard.

However, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and affected the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant was running D in Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, as a manufacturer of automobile parts.

On June 9, 2015, the Defendant would pay the rubber products to the victim E in cash by the end of the following month at a non-fluence place in Daegu or smaller on June 9, 2015.

Some shall make settlement in cash as soon as the delivery is received.

“The purpose of “ was to make a false statement.”

However, even if the goods are supplied by the injured party, there is no intention or ability to pay the price.

The Defendant received each rubber product equivalent to KRW 4,05,040 on June 9, 2015, equivalent to KRW 28,377,800 on the 13th day of the same month, KRW 7,387,380 on the 18th day of the same month, KRW 492,80 on the 22th day of the same month, from the victim, and acquired the delivery of rubber product equivalent to KRW 40,313,020 on the 4th day of the same month.

B. In light of the contents of each order issued by D to F, the characteristics of the subject matter of the contract, and the status of the execution of the contract by the remaining companies except F, etc., the lower court, based on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, by itself, acquired the Defendant by deceiving the victim intentionally, thereby defrauding the Defendant by receiving the entire amount of rubber products equivalent to KRW 40,313,020 from one time.

The defendant was found innocent because it is insufficient to recognize it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

(c)

1) The deception as a requirement for fraud is widely known.