The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. Around August 8, 2006, the Defendant stated in the facts charged that the Defendant would give a discount to the victim C’s agent D with a face value of KRW 29.8 million (hereinafter “instant promissory note”) issued by K2-time business retail Co., Ltd., which is owned by the victim, even though the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to discount a promissory note, the Defendant received the said promissory note from D and obtained it from the victim, namely, by fraud.

2. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the record, the facts charged in the instant case are insufficient to acknowledge the facts charged, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise. In light of the following circumstances, the documents, including the witness D’s legal statement, D, E, and F’s statement, are insufficient to acknowledge the facts charged in the instant case.

① The Promissory Notes are F owned by F, and F requested the Defendant to discount the Promissory Notes. During that process, F sent the Promissory Notes through D. However, D merely appears to have sent the Promissory Notes to the Defendant upon F’s request.

(A) If there is no substantial disadvantage to the defendant's defense right without impairing the identity of the facts charged, and there is no substantial disadvantage to the defendant's defense, the defendant should be found guilty by pointing out another actual victim as stated in the indictment without the amendment of the indictment. However, this case is a case proceeding with D's accusation, and if F is recognized as a fraud victim without the amendment of the indictment, it seems that it would give a substantial disadvantage to the defendant's defense right. Therefore, it is difficult to determine the fraud victim as F without the amendment of the indictment. (2) The defendant requested the discount of the promissory note of this case from F.