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

1. On November 10, 201, the Defendant stated in the instant charges that “The Defendant would purchase Samsung Motor Vehicle with the face value of KRW 9 million among the face value of KRW 3 million to the victim in Eda operated by the victim D in the Hanam-gun, Hanam-gun, Hanam-gun.”

However, the facts are that the defendant purchased and sold the used vehicle, and did not have the intention or ability to purchase the used vehicle for the victim.

Nevertheless, around November 14, 201, the Defendant received nine million won from the victim to the Agricultural Cooperative Account in the name of the Defendant.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

2. The Defendant asserts that D did not mean that “nine million won will be sold to Samsung Samsung Motor Vehicle with heavy face,” and that D would receive nine million won as a result of the purchase and repair of a used motor vehicle, which would be contrary to the profit of the trade.

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, D, without mentioning the specific types of automobiles, stated that “D purchased heavy Samsung Motor Vehicle at the intervals of purchasing it and selling it in profit.” The statement was ambiguous and vague, while the Defendant was engaged in repair and factory management at the F&M plant located in Gyeong-gun, Gyeong-gun, and the Defendant’s assertion that a traffic accident was low in the previous used motor vehicle and subsequently purchased it and subsequently sold it, there seems persuasive (D and the Defendant were six degrees). Accordingly, the Defendant decided to purchase 3.2 from G on November 14, 201, and the Defendant transferred part of KRW 350,000,000,000 from D to G for repair, from which the traffic accident occurred from G to 3.5,500,000,000 won was transferred from D, to G for the aforementioned maintenance and repair of the previous used motor vehicle.