beta
Text
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
1. On January 1, 2017, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant, at the office of the Co., Ltd. in the second floor of the Gyeonggi-si building B in Gwangju, would purchase a freezing tower and enter the said company, and arrange for the transportation of cargo to the F in the city of Ison-si in Gyeonggi-do, and pay to the victim KRW 600,000 per month under the name of the oil supply and the transportation fee for the oil supply and the 600,000 won per month.”
However, in fact, G entered into a contract of carriage with the defendant from May 1, 2016 to transport the cargo on the above carriage route, and decided to automatically renew the contract, so even if the defendant receives the freight commission from the injured party, it did not have any intention or ability to arrange the injured party to perform the freight carriage on the above carriage route.
On January 19, 2017, the Defendant received from the injured party a remittance of KRW 40 million from the account in the name of the Defendant from the account in the name of the wife H to the account in the name of the Defendant, as cargo brokerage fees.
Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.
2. Whether the Defendant, as stated in the facts charged, demanded or received KRW 40,00 won to the complainant as the “Tratry good” as stated in the facts charged, is consistent with this, and part of the complainant’s statement seems to be consistent. However, since the complainant’s statement in the accusation, the statement in the police and the prosecution, and the statement in this court are different, and the amount and the details of the payment are entirely inconsistent, credibility is very poor.
Rather, according to the records of this case, the complainant, such as the accusation, purchased the used freight amounting to KRW 145 million from the Defendant to receive KRW 6 million in return, in order to transport the freight from the Kim system ordered by F through the Defendant at the office of the Defendant around January 2017, and receive KRW 6 million from E to Echeon. However, unlike the Defendant’s promise, the complainant purchased the used freight amounting to KRW 145 million.