The Defendants are not guilty. The summary of the judgment of innocence against the Defendants is published.

-the applicant for compensation.

1. The summary of the facts charged, around June 30, 2010, the Defendants concluded a construction contract with the victim E, stating that “the owner would undertake construction works to remodel housing on the face of the cost of construction work,” and concluded a construction contract with the content that “the owner would undertake construction works to remodel housing on the face of the cost of construction work” up to 5 million won until August 10, 2010.

However, the above construction cost of KRW 55 million was a construction work for which no profit remains. In addition, Defendant A used part of the construction cost received from the victim for other purposes because there was no property at the time and there was no obligation equivalent to KRW 50 million. The Defendants did not have any intention or ability to complete the housing remodeling work even if they received the above construction cost from the victim from the beginning.

As above, the Defendants: (a) by deceiving the victim as above; (b) around June 30, 2010; (c) around July 19, 2010, Defendant A received payment of KRW 15 million from the victim; (d) KRW 15 million from the first intermediate payment around July 19, 201; (e) KRW 5 million from the second intermediate payment around August 24, 2010; and (e) million from the third intermediate payment around September 9, 2010.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to acquire 40 million won in total from the victim.

2. Determination

A. The intent of the crime of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of the crime of fraud, shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the objective circumstances such as the Defendant’s financial history, environment, details of the crime, and the process of performing the transaction before and after the crime unless the Defendant confessions (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Do3515, Dec. 10, 2004). The establishment of the crime of fraud shall be determined at the time of the act at the time of the act, and it shall not be punished for the crime of fraud on the ground that the Defendant

(See Supreme Court Decision 2008Do5618 Decided September 25, 2008, etc.). B.

At the time when the defendants received the above construction cost from the victim, whether there was a criminal intent to acquire it.