The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On August 14, 201, the summary of the facts charged by the Defendant is whether the victim E is detained by the Seoul Mapo Police Station at D’s office located in Busan Mapo-gu C around August 14, 2011.

“Along with the Seoul Central District Public Prosecutor’s Office, there was a false statement to the effect that the appointment of an attorney-at-law would be made to a fine or a suspended execution by requesting it to A.I.D. at least five million won.”

However, even if the defendant receives money from the injured party, he did not have the intention or ability to appoint a lawyer.

Ultimately, on August 19, 201, the Defendant received two copies of the check from the victim on August 19, 201, from the above D’s house to one million won, and acquired 80,000 won in cash around the 26th day of the same month and acquired 2,80,000 won in total.

2. Although it was necessary for the victim to appoint a defense counsel, the defendant was unable to appoint a defense counsel because the victim only 2.8 million won was not available.

argument is asserted.

The victim E appeared as a witness in this court and heard that the defendant's attorney fee is five million won or more, and tried to find out about five million won or more, but actually delivered to the defendant and testified that the money was 2.8 million won as stated in the facts charged.

In light of this point, it is insufficient to recognize the fact that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone by the defendant deceivings the victim as stated in the facts charged and defrauds the victim with 2.8 million won, and there is no other evidence to recognize it.

3. In conclusion, the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of facts constituting a crime, and thus, the defendant is acquitted under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.