The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant, at the time of receiving the goods from the victimized company, has a claim for construction cost sufficient to repay the goods at the time of receiving the goods from the victimized company, but it is not possible for the Defendant to receive it but the Defendant’s failure to repay the goods due to the default of payment by the victimized company, and it does not

2. Summary of the facts charged and the judgment of the court below

A. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant is the representative director of the D Co., Ltd. located in the second floor of the Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government building (hereinafter “D”), and the victim is the F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “damage Co., Ltd.”) located in Gangnam-gu Seoul EA building 303, a sanitary instrument and a water source retail company.

On August 22, 2012, the Defendant called D office, through G, a company employee, to the effect that “The Defendant calls to H, a representative of the victimized company, through G, and then makes a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant would supply goods without a framework, because it is necessary to provide sanitary instruments, etc. at the I site in Gyeonggi-si.”

However, D Co., Ltd. at the time had accumulated the debt amount of 4 billion won or more, and there was no intention or ability to pay the payment even if it received the goods such as sanitary intensity from the injured company, because the payment of the bill was more than 500 million won, but the payment of the bill was anticipated to be defaulted due to the lack of funds.

Accordingly, the Defendant, as seen above, by deceiving H as the representative of the victimized company, received from the victimized company the delivery of goods, such as sanitary implements equivalent to KRW 10,450,00 from around that time to August 28, 2012.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged based on the evidence of the lower court.

3. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the court below's evidence and records, the fact that D did not pay the victim's claim for the amount of goods due to the failure of payment due to the failure of payment.