The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged is a driver forkless driving.

On July 31, 2014, the Defendant is well aware of the victim’s “Sco-related persons at the site of domestic F redevelopment” at the E-owned office operated by Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C Victim D.

It is intended to deliver money to the co-related persons and connect them to enable them to carry out the work at the Spanco site.

The phrase “ makes a false statement.”

However, since the fact was not known to the sco-related person, there was no ability to introduce the day, and there was no intention to deliver all the money received from the injured person to the sco-related person.

The Defendant was immediately given 3,00,000 won in cash from the injured party.

2. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by this Court, it was proved to the extent that it could exclude a reasonable doubt about the Defendant’s act of defraudation.

It is difficult to see it.

(1) The defendant received 3 million won from a person who was damaged by the first investigative agency from the defendant was delivered to a person in charge of safety education, a person related to the punishment, or a security guard.

It was claimed (24,25 pages) and thereafter delivered to the person in charge of safety education, the head of the mold, the head of the Ban, and the security guards.

The assertion was made (34,36 pages of investigation records). Although the defendant's assertion is not accurately consistent with the G's statement that is considered below, the purport was to deliver all money received from the injured party as a whole.

② Meanwhile, a person in charge of safety education whose identity was confirmed after the Defendant’s statement

G consistently received 1 million won from the Defendant in the investigative agency on the following day, and the Defendant returned 1 million won to the head of the team directly operated by others than himself/herself, and provided money to the head of the team directly operated by others.

Defendant among G’s statements (Investigation Records 50 to 52, 69, 70, 76 pages).