beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of the facts) is that the defendant did not directly leave the court, but could deceiving a third party using a third party, and the defendant knew that G would receive goods from another company, and I supplied damaged goods directly to the defendant company, and since G stated that if it would have known the financial situation of the defendant company, it would not have been supplied, G would not have been supplied. Therefore, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of this part of the facts charged, even if it is recognized that the criminal intent of deception and fraud was committed, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts,
2. Determination
A. Judgment 1 on the primary facts charged is that the Defendant is a person who runs the F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”) that is a landscape lighting producer.
On May 17, 2011, the Defendant, at the above Company, needs to submit large amounts of us to G who is aware of the difficult financial situation of F. G in the early 2011.
The phrase “to pay the price immediately upon delivery of the material.” The above G again ordered the victim H representative director I to the victim H representative director, as it is, and received from the victim company the supply of content products equivalent to the total amount of KRW 635,301,722 on seven occasions, such as the list of crimes in the annexed crime list, from June 3, 201.
However, at the time of 2010, F continued aggravation of profitability such as reduction of 32.3% of the ordinary supply in 201 and reduction of 45.3% in around 201. On the other hand, since around 2008, F was charged with total of 1.169 million won for recovery and replacement costs due to the defects in the supply products of public institutions, and it was difficult to designate from November 2009 as a government-funded private company and make new stock owners difficult. Since around March 201 and June 201, F was disbursed KRW 1.3 billion with the replacement costs for the existing supply. Accordingly, it was difficult to pay interest amount of KRW 1.24 billion from the individual lending company to the extent that it was difficult to pay interest amount of KRW 70 million each year.