The defendant shall be innocent.

1. Around November 15, 2010, the summary of the facts charged stated that “The Defendant would purchase I land of Gyeonggi-gun to 670,50,050,000 won at “G cafeteria” located in F of Gyeonggi-gun, Gyeonggi-do. The Defendant first performed the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer of land, and then paid 200,000,000 won to the victim H immediately, and the balance of KRW 470,50,000,000,000,000 won, which would interfere with the graveyard 4 of the above land, or, even if not, if the permission for construction is obtained with the consent of the graveyard opening, immediately pay the land by

However, even if the Defendant obtained a loan by taking over the registration of ownership transfer of the above land from the victim as collateral, he did not have the intention or ability to pay the balance 470 million won to the victim.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, as above, made a false statement to the victim and received the registration of ownership transfer from the victim on December 17, 2010, which was transferred under the name of the J on the said land on May 13, 201, and subsequently acquired property benefits equivalent to the same amount by failing to pay 470 million won for the remainder of 720 million won even if he/she obtained a loan from the Gyeyang Agricultural Cooperative, even though he/she did not pay the maximum debt amount of 936 million won on the said land.

2. Determination

A. The intent of the crime of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of the crime of fraud, should be determined by comprehensively 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, insofar as the Defendant does not make a confession (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 94Do2048, Oct. 21, 1994). Meanwhile, the conviction should be based on evidence with probative value that leads to a judge to have a conviction to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt that the facts charged are true. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, even if there is no doubt about the Defendant’s guilt, the determination shall be based on the