The defendant is not guilty, and the summary of the judgment of innocence is publicly notified.

1. The prosecutor of the facts charged of the instant case: (a) on October 19, 2016, the Defendant was unable to operate the “company” to the extent that the Defendant could not pay the repair cost to its employees at once because the branch line belonging to C of the Defendant’s operation around January 2016, due to the collision with the breakwater; (b) the personal loan liability was exceeded KRW 400 million; and (c) even if the Defendant received oil from the victimized company due to economic difficulties, such as the amount of debt guarantee exceeds KRW 300 million, even if he did not have the intent or ability to pay the oil by the end of the next month (on November 30, 2016), the Defendant was in cash to the director of D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) (hereinafter “D”) (hereinafter “C”) who supplied the entire oil to the Plaintiff by the end of the next month.

“For the purpose of the foregoing, the member received from D an amount equivalent to KRW 6,79,639 of oil 70 drums, including mit A, miter A, from D, from February 14, 2017 from that time, from that time, the member acquired the supply of KRW 56,36,214 of the oil of the 440 drums totaling six times through G affiliated with C, the J of the Defendant and H industry I, and the L of the Defendant’s sole operation, such as the list of crimes.

Appellants, Defendant was prosecuted as a crime of fraud.

2. The establishment of fraud through deception shall be determined by whether there was an intentional intent to defraud the goods, etc. from the injured party by making a false statement as if the injured party were to repay the price of supplied goods, although there is no intention or ability to repay the price of supplied goods at the time of the transaction (Supreme Court Decision 2007Do10416 Decided February 28, 2008).