The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant did not deceiving the victim, and that the Defendant merely dealt with the payment due to a dispute arising with the victim due to the reduction of the price for the discarded fireworks after being supplied with the fireworks, and that the Defendant was not supplied with the fireworks without the intention or ability to pay the price from the beginning, the lower court convicted the Defendant of the facts charged in this case.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged is as follows: (a) from April 2016, the Defendant engaged in the business of operating “G” with F in Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City E, and (b) engaged in the business of managing and settling funds of the said G; and (c) engaged in the business of purchasing and selling fishery products.

On September 1, 2016, the Defendant made a false statement in the “J” operated by the victim I located in the Ha, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, that the Defendant would supply the victim the fireworks from September 2, 2016 to the victim via said F, and then transfer the proceeds after the lapse of one week.

However, at the time of fact, the Defendant had no intent or ability to pay the amount properly to the victim, even if the amount receivable that the Defendant did not receive from the customer in operating G is equivalent to KRW 50,79,800, while the unpaid amount that was not paid to the customer is equal to KRW 111,623,650, etc. due to the difficulties in its operation, etc., even if the amount unpaid to the customer is supplied on credit from the damaged party.

The Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim as above; (b) was provided from September 2, 2016 to September 13, 2016 with an amount equivalent to KRW 13,090,000,000, in total, from September 6, 2016 to the victim; and (c) transferred the amount of KRW 3,145,000 from September 6, 2016 to the deposit account in the victim’s name; and (d) did not pay the remainder of KRW 9,945,00,00 from September 13, 2016 to the victim’s pecuniary advantage.

B. Determination 1) The intent of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of fraud, is to be determined by comprehensively taking account of the objective circumstances such as the Defendant’s financial history, environment, details of the crime, and the process of transaction before and after the crime, unless the Defendant is led to confession.