beta
Text
The defendant is innocent.
Reasons
1. The summary of the facts charged is the person running D (hereinafter, “Defendant Company”) in Kimhae-si, the Defendant Company, around November, 2013, did not have any intent or ability to pay the price even if the Defendant was supplied with the goods from the Victim E Co., Ltd (hereinafter, “victim”) in a situation where the obligation to pay the price for the goods that was not paid due to the legal management status was equivalent to 500 million won and it is difficult for the Defendant Company to pay the price for the goods to the extent that it would not be able to pay monthly wages to its employees.
1. On November 13, 2013, at the Defendant Company’s office, the Defendant: (a) falsely concluded to the effect that “The Defendant would pay money without money from the end of the following month from the supply of parts necessary for the manufacturing, etc. of industrial environmental facilities” to G, who is the victim’s director via F of the purchasing department; and (b) obtained from the injured party the supply of goods equivalent to KRW 16,50,000 in total amount of KRW 16,50,000 on the same day from the same day; and (c) obtained the supply of goods from the injured party.
2. On December 10, 2013, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the said G in the same manner at the office of the Defendant Company; and (b) obtained from the injured party the supply of goods equivalent to KRW 52,800 from the total sum of KRW 16 of BEARIN (unit price of KRW 3,000 per unit price) and acquired them by deception.
2. Determination:
A. The criminal intent of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of a general legal doctrine, shall be determined by taking into account objective circumstances such as the re-power of the accused, etc. before and after the crime, the environment, the details and details of the crime, and the process of transaction execution, so long as the accused does not make a confession. Meanwhile, the conviction should be based on evidence with probative value that leads to the conviction that the facts charged are true to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt by the judge. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, even if there is suspicion of guilt against the accused, it is inevitable to determine it as the benefit of the accused, and this is also necessary to recognize the criminal intent