The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

1. The Defendant is the representative director of the shipbuilding machinery company C Co., Ltd.

On November 25, 2014, the Defendant issued an order for the processed products of shipbuilding machinery and equipment as if the victims E were properly paid the price of supplied goods to the victim C Co., Ltd. located in Da at the same time.

However, the Defendant, as the representative director of the F Co., Ltd., in addition to C Co., Ltd., was operating the said company, received a loan of 9 billion won from the bank at the end of the end of 2012, and made investments in an unreasonable amount, thereby leaving out financial conditions while starting a G Co., Ltd., a large block producer. From March 2013, the cumulative deficit caused delay in transaction partners or wages, etc., and around around the time of around 2015, the Defendant was unable to pay approximately KRW 1.143 billion, and there was no intention or ability to pay the said amount even if he received the processed goods of shipbuilding from the injured party.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received the total amount of KRW 13,973,00 from the victim on November 25, 2014, KRW 46,940,00 on December 25, 2014, KRW 17,140,00 on January 30, 2015, KRW 14,76,00 on February 28, 2015, KRW 25,60,000 on April 6, 2015, KRW 6,058,50 on April 30, 2015, KRW 25,000 on the aggregate of KRW 25,60,00 on May 30, 2015, KRW 7,050 on the processed goods, including KRW 70,005,00 on May 30, 2015, and supplied them.

2. Determination

A. Whether fraud is established through the defraudation of transactional goods shall be determined by whether the Defendant made a false statement as if the victim were changed although there was no intent or ability to repay the obligation for the price of delivered goods at the time of transaction. As such, the obligation for the price of delivered goods cannot be repaid due to changes in economic conditions after delivery, etc.

The act of fraud does not constitute fraud (see Supreme Court Decisions 2002Do5265, Jan. 24, 2003; 2005Do7481, Nov. 24, 2005; 2005Do7481, Nov. 24, 2005).