The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant was supplied with three engines, fire-fighting pumps (hereinafter “instant pumps”) with respect to social welfare foundation E companies, as stated in the judgment of the court below. However, since the Defendant agreed with the victimized company at the time to pay the price after completion of fire-fighting system installation works, it did not have to pay the price immediately after the completion of the above fire-fighting system installation works, the Defendant’s criminal intent of defraudation related thereto is not recognized.

Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., (i) compliance with the facts charged of this case: (i) particularly, the defendant, at the time of the supply contract, agreed to pay the pertinent pumps to the victimized company immediately after being supplied with the pertinent pumps; (ii) the defendant agreed to pay the pertinent pumps after the completion of fire-fighting system installation works with the victimized company as well as to pay them consistently with the court below's investigation agency, the representative director of the victimized company to the effect that "at the time of the supply contract, the defendant clearly agreed to pay the pertinent pumps to the victimized company immediately after the completion of the fire-fighting system installation; (iii) the defendant is also determined by the defendant's ability or effort in the circumstances where the victimized company, which entered into the first supply contract with the defendant, could not secure the credit or ability of the defendant; and (iv) the defendant can only be seen through the above decision of the defendant.