beta
Text
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
The Defendant, at around 16:00 on September 6, 201, received KRW 35 million from C inasmuch as he/she did not have the intent or ability to repay the money, even if he/she received the money from the agricultural branch of Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Seoul-si, and received KRW 35 million from C inasmuch as he/she did not have the intent or ability to repay it.
Judgment
The sole evidence to acknowledge the facts charged of the instant case is C’s investigative agency and the statement in this court.
However, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the record, it is difficult to believe C’s statement that he/she agreed to receive payment within 10 days and lent KRW 35 million as it is. Rather, the above KRW 35 million, as alleged by the Defendant, seems to have been given free of charge by either C, who is in an internal relationship with the Defendant or was in an interest of the Defendant, or who was in an interest of the Defendant, or who was aware that it would be difficult for the Defendant to repay.
1) C appears to have not received the above loan certificate at the time of giving the above money to the Defendant. A copy of the loan certificate which C filed by the Defendant and submitted by the Defendant is written in the body of the Defendant, but the date and time of preparation and the maturity of payment, the borrowed amount is different from the amount of the instant fraud, and a part of the document was distorted and copied. Therefore, it is difficult to view that C was drafted at the time of the instant case. 2) Even around 2009, the prior transfer of the instant case, obtained 20 million won to the Defendant, and the Defendant filed a fraudulent complaint and withdrawn the complaint.
3) As such, C was aware that it had not been able to repay the existing debt at the time when C gave 35 million won to the Defendant, and C was not able to repay the money due to the lack of any special property to the Defendant. 4) Although C was aware that the Defendant had no economic capacity, C was able to pay the money in trust by selling the money even if it was gross property, it was stated that C lent the money to the Defendant.