In the event that a person who has no ability to repay obtains money by pretending to repay, the intent of the fraud;

Where the money is borrowed or the goods are purchased by pretending to be repaid in spite of the absence of the intention of repayment or the promise to repay within the due date, the crime of defraudation may be recognized.

Article 347 of the Criminal Act

Supreme Court Decision 83Do1048 Delivered on August 23, 1983

Defendant

Defendant

Seoul Criminal Court Decision 86No2507 delivered on May 29, 1986

The appeal is dismissed.

The number of detention days after an appeal shall be included in the original sentence.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

The gist of the grounds of appeal is as follows: (a) the judgment of the court of first instance or the judgment of the court of first instance, as cited by the court below, shall not only misleads the facts against the rules of evidence but also misleads the legal principles as to the intent of fraud. In light of the evidence cited by the judgment of the court of first instance as cited by the judgment of the court of first instance, comparing the records and records, the measures of the court below which recognized each crime against the defendant may be pride; (b) there is no error of law by misunderstanding facts against the rules of evidence as to the facts against the rules of evidence as to the defendant; and (c) in a case where the money is borrowed or the goods are purchased by pretending to be repaid without the intention of repayment or the promised due date of payment, regardless of the absence of the intent of repayment, it is possible to recognize the intent of fraud (see Supreme Court Decision 83Do1048, Aug. 23

We cannot accept the issue on the premise of facts inconsistent with the original judgment, which is not consistent with the original judgment, to criticize the preparation of evidence and the fact-finding, which are the exclusive authority of the

Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed and part of the detention days after the appeal shall be included in the original sentence. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all Justices who reviewed the appeal.

Justices Kim Jong-sik (Presiding Justice)