The defendant shall be innocent.

In the instant facts charged, the Defendant, around June 1, 2018, received from the victim C’s residence in Seosan-si and around September 4, 2018, a total of KRW 22,400,000 from eight times in total by means of the following methods: (a) the Defendant, despite having no intent or ability to normally repay to the victim even if he/she borrowed money from the victim; and (b) he/she received money from the victim to Defendant D E Association account in the name of the same day on the same day; and (c) the Defendant received money from the victim to September 4, 2018 by remitting KRW 22,40,000 in total from eight times in total as indicated in the attached crime list.

2. Determination

A. In a criminal trial, the conviction of guilt ought to be based on evidence with probative value, which makes a judge not having any reasonable doubt that the facts charged are true. Thus, if there is no evidence to form such a conviction, even if there is a suspicion of guilt against the defendant, it is inevitable to determine it with the benefit of the defendant.

(See Supreme Court Decision 9Do4305 delivered on February 25, 2000, etc.). B.

The defendant has been punished for fraud three times even before, and there is a doubt that the defendant does not intend to acquire some money against the complainants when considering the way of approaching the complainants.

However, in full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, it is difficult to readily conclude that the complainant paid eight times to the defendant all the amount that the complainant paid to the defendant for the purpose of “a loan to the solar-powered business and the amount of living cost,” such as the attached list of crimes in the indictment. Of these, it is unclear whether the amount is the subject of deception as well as the subject of the above deception.