beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of grounds for appeal;
A. At the time of concluding a subcontract with the victim, the Defendant was not aware of the possibility that the Defendant could not pay the claim for construction price to the victim because there was a claim for construction price to be paid from the Plaintiff-based truck in the form of a common agreement (hereinafter “in its original form”).
B. Moreover, since the result of one victim's construction belongs to the original hearing form, there is no benefit acquired by the defendant.
2. Determination
A. As to the assertion that the Defendant and the defense counsel did not deception, the lower court also made the same assertion, and the lower court rejected the Defendant and the defense counsel’s above assertion on the following grounds: (a) it was acknowledged that there was an intentional act with respect to the Defendant and the defense counsel at least that it would be difficult for the Defendant to pay the cost of the defense counsel in light of the circumstances at the time, even if the Defendant had already been entrusted with construction work with the victim around January 13, 2013 when determining the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion.
In comparison with the evidence records, a thorough examination of the judgment of the court below is conducted by the defendant, and the defendant could not receive more than KRW 40 million for additional construction cost at the time of concluding a subcontract with the victim, and in particular, the defendant would not raise funds by himself without providing the original form. However, the defendant did not easily raise funds at any other place due to bad credit standing at that time, and the defendant did not complete the construction of this case and was locked around April 2013. In light of the above, the decision of the court below on this part is acceptable, and the above argument by the defendant is without merit.
(b) Determination of fraud regarding the assertion that he/she did not obtain any benefit shall also be made when he/she has had a third party receive property or acquire pecuniary benefits.