The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The Defendant, under the trade name of “C”, was a door-to-door seller who sells cosmetics, functional clothes, etc., operates the above company, has a debt of 220 million won in financial institutions, and led to the situation where the purchase of goods is impossible due to the difficulties in the financial situation of the company, with intent to borrow money from others.

1. Around March 2012, the Defendant purchased “C” goods from the office of “C” operated by the Defendant in front of the Defendant in front of the Jeonsan-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City. On the loan of a credit card, the Defendant made a payment prior to the settlement date of the credit card payment. He had the victim contact the Dong H of the victim who works at the G cafeteria, G si-si, and around that time he had H pay KRW 2 million with the credit card, and had H contact the victim’s relative I with the victim’s relative, thereby having the victim settle KRW 1.5 million with the credit card of J. I.

2. On March 2012, 2012, K in the former Hamman-gun of the former Hamman made a false statement to the victim, stating, “The victim will pay KRW 8,90,000,000,000,00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00,000

Accordingly, the defendant, by deceiving the victim, acquired a total amount of 3.5 million won and acquired 4.5 million won.

2. The defendant and his defense counsel had no intention to commit the crime of defraudation at the time of the instant case.

3. Whether fraud is established through the deception of the borrowed money is determined at the time of borrowing. Therefore, even if the defendant had the intent and ability to repay the borrowed money at the time of borrowing, it is merely a civil default, and it cannot be said that a criminal fraud is established. Meanwhile, the existence of the criminal intent of defraudation, which is a subjective element of the crime of fraud, shall be determined as of the time of borrowing.