All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts and determination on such assertion [2015 Gohap 392 / [2015 / [392] Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) for the Victim G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”)], which the Defendant operated at the time when the Defendant’s assertion was supplied by

The F is normally operated, and the F has the intent and ability to pay the price for the goods.

Moreover, the Defendant provided a security for the victim by establishing a collateral on the land owned by DN, BR, and AJ. In fact, the victim recovered the amount of KRW 430 million in the auction procedure.

In the end, this is nothing more than a non-performance of civil liability, and thus, there was a criminal defendant's deception or fraud by the criminal defendant.

subsection (b) of this section.

Judgment

The Defendant argued to the same effect as the grounds for appeal in this part in the lower judgment.

On October 201, the lower court explained in detail that there was no evidence supporting the Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant was liable for considerable debts, while holding the sales claims, and that there was no evidence supporting the Defendant’s claim, that the Defendant ordered the Defendant to sell the paper supplied by the injured party at a printing office more than the cost, that the Defendant was punished by committing the crime by means similar to the instant case, that the Defendant had the record of committing the crime by means of fraud, that the Defendant was not only the value of the security provided by the injured party, but also was difficult to pay the amount normally according to the payment deadline set forth in the contract with the injured party, and that the Defendant acquired money by deceiving the representative director of the injured party, thereby obtaining a paper equivalent to KRW 548,757,984 from

The decision was determined.

In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below in addition to the circumstances stated in detail by the court below, the above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and it is the defendant's person.