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

1. On November 6, 2015, the Defendant stated that “A victim C who became aware of the trade name in the Daegu Northern Dong-gu, Daegu Northern-dong through a literature and answer, which is an Internet portal site’s knowledge, will stop a second-story house with the second-rised material in Cheongdo-si, Cheongdo-si, by December 10, 2015, on the face of the State, until December 10, 2015.”

However, in fact, even if the Defendant received the construction cost from the injured party with a loan of KRW 250,000,000, he did not use it properly for the construction cost, and did not have the intent and ability to construct a wooden house for the victim.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 20 million from the victim, to the account in the name of Defendant wife E on November 6, 2015, KRW 20 million on November 16, 2015, KRW 20 million on November 16, 2015, and KRW 2 million on November 19, 2015, respectively, and received KRW 45 million on November 16, 2015 as a check.

2. The burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial of related legal principles is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction of guilt must be based on evidence with probative value sufficient for a judge to have the truth that the facts charged are true beyond reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no such evidence, even if there is doubt as to the defendant's guilt, it shall be determined in the interest of the defendant (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Do9633, Nov. 11, 2010, etc.). Whether fraud is established shall be determined as at the time of such act, and it shall not be punished for fraud on the ground that the defendant's non-performance status resulted from changes in economic conditions after such act, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do5618, Sept. 25, 2008).

A. The following circumstances can be acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this Court: