beta
Text
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
1. Around June 29, 2011, the Defendant: (a) sent a loan to an employee who was unable to know his/her name by phone call at a three-lane Cmp loan Co., Ltd. in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu; and (b) applied for a loan by pretending that the Defendant would normally repay his/her loan obligations; and (c) provided a loan to such employee.
However, the Defendant was liable for a loan of KRW 190 million at the time. The Defendant paid interest on the above debt amounting to approximately KRW 4 million per month, and he was unable to repay the above debt solely with the income no other income or property other than monthly income, and the Defendant was provided with a loan from the victim to repay interest on the above debt amounting to KRW 10.6 million at the time of the loan from four other lending companies at the time of the loan amounting to KRW 10.6 million at around November of the same year, and the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay the loan according to the agreement, even if he received the loan from the victim, such as filing an application for individual rehabilitation, etc. on November of the same year.
As above, the Defendant deceptioned the victim, and obtained 3 million won as a loan from the victim, and acquired it by fraud.
2. Determination
A. The defendant asserts that although he/she received a loan from the victim, he/she does not have an intent to acquire the loan by fraud.
B. The intent of the crime of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of the crime of fraud, shall be determined by taking into account the objective circumstances, such as the Defendant’s financial history, environment, details and details of the crime, and the process of transaction execution, insofar as the Defendant does not make a confession. Meanwhile, the conviction ought to be based on evidence with probative value to lead a judge to feel true that the facts charged are true to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, even if there is a suspicion of guilt against the Defendant, it is inevitable to determine it as the benefit of the Defendant, which is a subjective element of the crime of fraud.