beta
Text
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
1. On March 30, 2011, at a place where it is difficult to know the place, the Defendant requested to loan three million won to an employee who is not aware of the name of the victim Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “victim Co., Ltd.”) by telephone and make a misrepresentation as if he would normally repay the loan to an employee.
The Defendant was given a loan of three million won to a deposit account in the name of the Defendant around the 30th of the same month from the victim company that believed this.
However, at the time, the defendant did not have any intention or ability to pay the loan normally even if he received a loan from the victim company due to a difficult economic situation, such as that he did not pay a debt amounting to KRW 190,000,000 per annum, while he did not pay a debt amounting to KRW 52,000 per annum.
Accordingly, the defendant was given property from the victim company by deceiving the victim.
2. Determination
A. The Defendant does not have the intent or ability to repay the obligation of the loan at the time of borrowing, but denies the criminal intent of defraudation.
B. According to the records, the defendant was working for D Co., Ltd. from around 2001 to around 201, while obtaining approximately KRW 59 million in income. At the time of the application for the loan of this case, the defendant was responsible for the unsecured debt amounting to about KRW 180,000,000 per month to pay the principal and interest of the loan of this case. The defendant was consulted with a mutual savings bank on March 28, 201, but the above savings bank did not provide loans, but the above savings bank introduced the victim company as it was difficult to provide loans, and the employee of the victim company introduced the victim company to inform the defendant of the defendant's resident registration number. After about about about 20 minutes, employees in charge of the victim company loan of about KRW 20,00 in income by telephone from the defendant, and around March 29, 2011, the defendant sent necessary documents, such as the certificate of employment of the victim company, and the certificate of employment of the victim company.