beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant borrowed money from the damaged party in addition to KRW 47,820,000,000, which is the instant borrowed money, but most of the amounts including the existing borrowed money have been repaid, and there is no intention to commit fraud.
Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to guilty.
2. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s judgment and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by this court, it is recognized that the Defendant received a total of KRW 47,820,000 from the person who was injured by the criminal intent of the negligence or fraud.
Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.
A. The victim shall pay off the money from the defendant if he/she lends the money to the investigative agency.
“The payment of interest on the third part of each month shall be made at the end of July 6, 201, and loans total of KRW 47,820,000 over six occasions from July 6, 201 to January 30, 201.
The principal and interest have not been paid properly.
“The Defendant made a concrete statement on the Defendant’s speech at the time of borrowing the money (the Defendant consented to all the protocol containing the victim’s statement at the lower court). B. At the time of borrowing the money, the Defendant had not reached the previous company’s default and did not pay taxes properly, and was in a bad credit position, and had already been liable for a considerable amount of money.
In addition, the defendant used most of the money borrowed from the damaged party as living expenses and other debts.
(c)
Defendant
In addition, the prosecutor made a statement in the prosecutor's office that "at the time of economic difficulties, the victim's money could not be repaid" (64 pages of evidence record).
(d)
Since the defendant paid most of the money to the victim, he did not have any intention to commit fraud.
The argument is asserted.
(1) However, the witness I gives time limit to the victim on July 2010 and August 2010.