The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

1. The summary of the facts charged by the Defendant on September 19, 2008, Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government

C. At the 7th floor office of the Defendant’s operation D Co., Ltd., the fact that the fact was received down payment from the victim E, but the victim did not have the intent or ability to allow the victim to operate the brin restaurant, the victim made a false statement to the effect that the victim “in order to operate the brin restaurant at the construction site of the F hotel located in the Gyeongbuk-gu, Gyeongbuk-gu, the victim must have the down payment amount of KRW 10 million.” The victim received KRW 10 million as the down payment from the victim and acquired it by the victim.

2. The Defendant asserts that the victim had an intention or ability to operate a brin restaurant and denies the criminal intent of defraudation.

The establishment of facts constituting a crime in a criminal trial ought to be based on strict evidence with probative value, which leads a judge to have such convictions as to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt. Thus, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof fails to sufficiently reach the extent that such convictions may lead to such convictions, the determination ought to be made in the interests of the defendant even if there is suspicion of guilts, such as the defendant’s assertion or defense is contradictory or unreasonable.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Do14487 Decided April 28, 201, etc.). In other words, the following circumstances acknowledged by the record, i.e., (i) a company G, a building owner, awarded a contract for a construction of a F hotel (hereinafter “instant construction”) with the construction cost of at least 7.35 million won for the construction cost of the instant construction to D with the representative director, who is awarded a contract with H for the construction cost of at least 10,000,000,000 from the Plaintiff, the building owner, for which the Defendant is the representative director; (ii) in light of the scale of the said new construction, it appears that the construction site was necessary to open and operate the brin restaurant at the instant construction site; and (iii) the replacement between the Defendant and the president, as Defendant and D directors.