The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On March 27, 2014, the Defendant made a false statement in the facts charged that “The Defendant will immediately pay the price for an election, making a name tag, banner, etc., to be run as a member of the local election council on June 4, 2014, at the E office operated by the complainant D (46 tax) who is the complainant in C, as of March 27, 2014.

However, even if the defendant was provided with printed matters for election by the complainant, he did not have the intention or ability to pay the price.

The defendant deceivings the complainant as above, and 11 times from that date until April 18, 2014, the defendant obtained 3,908,300 won of goods, such as placards and promotional materials, and acquired them by deception without paying the price.

2. Determination

A. Whether fraud is established through the deception of the borrowed money is determined at the time of borrowing. As such, if the defendant had the intent and ability to repay at the time of borrowing, then it is impossible to repay the borrowed money due to changes in economic conditions thereafter.

Even if this is merely a simple non-performance of civil liability, it can not be said that criminal fraud is established.

The intent of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of one fraud, shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the objective circumstances such as the Defendant’s financial history, environment, content of the crime, process of transaction, and relationship with the victim before and after the crime, unless the Defendant is led to confession (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do1809, 2015Do2844, Jun. 11, 2015). (b) Comprehensively taking account of each of the instant evidence submitted by the prosecutor, there is no doubt of guilt as to the instant facts charged.

However, on the other hand, the following facts and circumstances, which can be acknowledged by adding up each evidence submitted by the Defendant to the City Council at the time of the instant case, namely, ① the Defendant’s property reported by the City Council at the time of the instant case exceeds KRW 300,000,000,000 if the Defendant’s mother’s property is consistent with the Defendant’s mother’s property, up to KRW 395,00,00