beta
Text
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
1. On August 2012, the summary of the facts charged, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim D through a person who is not a policeman at the early police station, stating that “The Defendant would supply a household for office work to the lower Architect office and approve the price immediately on his/her face.”
However, even if the household is supplied by the victim, there is no intention or ability to pay the credit.
Ultimately, around August 30, 2012, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim; (b) obtained from the victim the supply of household units equivalent to KRW 8,495,300 to the “F” architect office located in Chungcheongnam-gun E and 102, the architect office of the Defendant, which is the architect office of the Defendant; and (c) obtained it by deception.
2. As to the determination, the Defendant asserts to the effect that the Defendant did not pay the price of the household even after being supplied with D, but did not agree to pay the price immediately at the time, and that the price of the design service was paid at the time of receiving the price of the design service, the Defendant did not pay the price of the instant household inevitably due to the delay in the payment of the design service, and that there was no criminal intent
Therefore, it is difficult to believe that the police interrogation protocol of the defendant, as shown in part of the facts charged in this case, against the defendant's rejection of its contents and its admissibility, and the police statement of D (the defendant's immediate payment after being supplied to the household) is contrary to D and C's respective legal statements (the defendant's payment after being supplied to the household), it is difficult to pay the cost of the service.
Meanwhile, according to each construction design and construction supervision payment confirmation, the original copy of the decision of recommending reconciliation, each lease agreement submitted by the Defendant, etc., it appears that the Defendant had the ability to repay due to having considerable property, such as design service payment claims, lease deposit repayment claims, etc., and there is no evidence to acknowledge the facts charged in the instant case.
A complaint shall be filed.