beta
Text
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
1. The Defendant is the lead of the successful bidder of the 50 million won fake bid, and the victim C is a member who has joined two successful bidders.
However, on June 9, 2012, the victim was awarded a successful bid for one unit, but the victim received only KRW 20 million as a deposit, and the victim could not receive the remainder KRW 22690,000.
Accordingly, the Defendant, at a coffee shop on the second floor of the 2nd century on June 16, 2012, paid to the victim an aggregate of KRW 74 million, including the remainder of the 22.69 billion that the victim received less than the victim, and the interest for delay in payment of the remainder of the 1st unit, and the interest for delay in payment, etc., which was not awarded at a successful bid. By the specific method, the Defendant, from August 9, 2012 to November 9, 2012, collected the payment of the fraternity from the members of the fraternity each month from around August 9, 2012 to agreed to enable the victim to escape instead of the Defendant.
Nevertheless, the Defendant collected the deposit of KRW 13.75 million from several members of the fraternity on September 9, 2012, and collected the deposit of KRW 10 million on October 9, 2012, and collected the deposit of KRW 10 million on or around November 9, 2012, and collected the deposit of KRW 33.75 million on or around November 9, 2012, and prepared the deposit of KRW 33.75 million on or around November 9, 2012, the Defendant violated his/her duties, and used it for private purposes, instead, by the victim.
As a result, the Defendant acquired pecuniary benefits equivalent to KRW 3,3750,000,00 and caused damages equivalent to the same amount to the victim by acting in violation of his duties.
2. On the other hand, the above facts charged constitute a crime of breach of trust under the Criminal Act since the Defendant, the leading party, based on the premise that the successful bidder in September, October and November 2012 of the successful bidder in the instant case was C, did not pay the fraternity to C. However, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, in particular, according to the witness’s statement in the third trial record, even if it is based on the witness’s statement in September, October and November.