The accused shall disclose the summary of the judgment of innocence.

1. Summary of the facts charged

A. On August 23, 2013, the Defendant, at the D legal office located in Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Jongno-gu, there is a lack of construction funds for the victim E to build studio in F in the Chungcheongbuk-si.

A loan shall be received after the completion of construction or a deposit shall be paid.

“...”

However, in fact, at the time of the studio construction, the Defendant did not have the ability to repay even if he borrowed money from the damaged party, because the provisional attachment of approximately KRW 430 million,00,000,000,000, totaling the maximum amount of the claim and the claim amount, was established on the land owned by the Defendant, and even if the studio was completed, it was uncertain whether the building was completed and whether the loan of financial rights was made.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, obtained delivery of KRW 2,168,00,000,000 from the victim on August 23, 2013, KRW 9540,00 from the victim, KRW 9540,00,000 on September 16, 2013, and KRW 2,168,00,00,000 from the victim.

B. On January 29, 2014, the Defendant was unable to complete the construction in the mutual influent restaurant located in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Governmentcheon-dong, as the victim “H completed the I construction work, and there was no money to receive the certificate of purification writing and the certificate of performance guarantee for defects.”

A quasi-public offering made a loan from the Credit Union and made a loan to B, and thus receiving the loan, the payment of the loan to B shall be made to B, and the cost of issuing a bond for the performance of defects shall be changed.

However, the defendant merely thought that he would use the above money as the fund for the above G Studio Construction, and did not think that he would receive money from H as the cost of issuing a security for performance of defects and would not have borrowed money from the victim. The defendant did not have the ability to repay the money even if he borrowed money from the victim, such as the preceding paragraph.

As such, the defendant deceivings the victim and is in the seat of the victim.