beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal was known to the effect that at the time when the Defendant received KRW 20 million from the complainant C, E was in a situation where the progress of the business was improper and thus, the Defendant was aware that the content of the promise made to C is likely to not be properly implemented.
Therefore, even though the defendant had sufficiently recognized the fact of deceiving C as stated in the facts charged by deceiving C and deceiving 20 million won, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of the facts charged in this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.
2. Determination
A. On April 14, 2008, the summary of the facts charged of the instant case stated that, within the vehicle of the Defendant parked on a road that is parked in the Gunju-dong of Priju-si, Priju-si, the Defendant: (a) stated that, “A person who started operating a secondhand body and does not know well the work of the water system, may be removed and removed from the site of Cheongju-si construction work, and may be subject to a contract on face-to face-face surface.”
However, the fact was that the construction site at the time was not in progress, and even D representative E, a corporation, which entered into a contract for removal and removal of scrap metal prior to the complainant, also tried to recover funds as a result of delay in the performance of the above contract. Since there is no other property or revenue, even if the defendant receives money from C as the down payment for the above construction site removal and removal of scrap metal, he did not have any intention or ability to allow C to perform removal and removal of scrap metal.
The Defendant, by deceiving C as such, received KRW 20 million from C as the down payment, to the Agricultural Cooperatives Deposit Account in the name of F.
B. In light of the witness G, E, and H’s respective legal statements, the lower court determined that the Defendant’s statement in C’s investigation agency and court alone is KRW 20 million from the complainant.