beta
Text
The defendant shall dismiss the application filed by the applicant for compensation of innocence.
Reasons
1. On November 30, 2009, the summary of the facts charged, the Defendant, on the part of the victim D, who was preparing to open a restaurant called F in Suwon-gu, Busan, would offer a false statement that “The Defendant would lend money to the victim because he would have borrowed money, so he would have it repaid off to him.”
However, the defendant did not have any intention or ability to repay money even if he borrowed money from the victim due to a large amount of personal debt.
The Defendant received from the victim a total of four times, including five million won on the same day, five million won on December 2, 2009, one million won on March 15, 2010, and ten million won on May 14, 2010, and four million won on a total of four occasions, including five million won on the same day, from the victim.
Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.
2. Determination:
A. The Defendant asserts that since 20% of the restaurant earnings was received from D, the Defendant borrowed 40,000,000 won in terms of living expenses, etc. on four occasions, as he/she would be able to settle the proceeds with such profits, he/she did not have any intention to commit fraud.
B. The following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, namely, D, having engaged in bond business, lent 40 million won to the Defendant for about six months without setting interest and maturity for the introduction of her friendship for the opening of the cooling house business. The Defendant was at least on a ten-month basis in the cooling house operated by D and did not receive monthly pay from D even though D had worked for about 10 months in the employees management, the Kabter management, and the parking management. D was paid at least eight months after the date of first lending the money, and D was well paid at around July and August 2010, an amount equivalent to 20% of the profits, as stated in D. In full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant appears to have borrowed 40 million won from D merely, as stated in D’s facts charged.