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

1. On June 30, 2010, the Defendant, at the victim C’s office located in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (Seoul Dongdaemun-gu) around June 30, 2010, would supply the functional health foods to the victim and pay the price for the goods with a promissory note and a check with no defects.

“.....”

However, the Defendant had already defaulted on February 23, 2010, and the Defendant was liable for the amount of KRW 200 million for goods by providing a promissory note, a check, etc. to a large number of customers with no particular property or financial resources and with the lack of deposits. However, there was a situation where approximately KRW 400 million was issued, but the payment was refused due to shortage of deposits. Therefore, even if the Defendant issued a promissory note and a check from the injured party and received the delivery of functional health foods, there was no intention or ability to pay the price normally.

On July 24, 2010, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim as above; (b) supplied B/L at the factory located in Seongbuk-gun E located in Gyeongsung-gun operated by the victim; and (c) delivered F/L equivalent to the amount of “F/L” at the market price of KRW 17 million; and (d) was supplied with health functional foods worth KRW 324,300,000 in total market price from July 1, 2010 to July 29, 2010 in the same manner as indicated in the attached list of crimes.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

2. Determination

A. In a criminal trial, the finding of guilt must be based on evidence of probative value, which leads a judge to the conviction that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt.

If the prosecutor's proof does not reach such a level of conviction, even if there are suspicions of guilt, it cannot be determined with the benefit of the defendant.

B. Each evidence duly adopted and examined by this Court.