The defendant shall be innocent.

The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant, on July 201, who was engaged in the export business of a remote area in China against China on July 21, 201, was urged to pay 100,000 Chinese money (16,700,000 won in Chinese currency) from China (China), and that the Victim E, a remote area exporting company, would be the Defendant’s company, and that “The Defendant orders the Victim E to pay 100,000 won in a remote area instead of a remote area” and sent C a remote area equivalent to 100,000 won in the above bill to the Victim E around July 21, 201, and it was believed that the Defendant would receive 16,700,000 won in Chinese currency when exporting the above remote area.

However, the facts are that the Defendant only engaged in the business with the victim E only from October 2010 to June 201, and thereafter there was no right such as the victim E or the above F claims after settling the partnership, and there was no intention or ability to pay the Defendant's debt in lieu of the remote area in F's remote area.

Ultimately, as seen above, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim through the above C, exported out of the victim a remote area equivalent to 100,000 square meters of the above bill to C, thereby avoiding the Defendant’s repayment of the Defendant’s debt to C.

Judgment

The summary of the facts charged of this case is as follows: (a) the Defendant, by deceiving E through C, had E export out of a remote area equivalent to the 100,000 of the 10,000 bill to E; and (b) thereby, acquired 10,000 won bill from E.

‘' is the same.

However, as stated in the facts charged, it is recognized that the defendant, as stated in the facts charged, had C by deceiving C and believed it as a fact, ordered E to order E out-of-the-counter area by having C receive claims on the above 100,000 won.