The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged is a person who actually operated D Co., Ltd. established for the purpose of exporting fiberss.

On September 20, 2012, the Defendant presented the victim’s general samples to G at the victim FF office located in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Seoul, stating that “When the plant of the Defendant produces the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of which the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant

However, the fact was that the Defendant’s plant located in the location of business is partially in operation due to the deterioration of facilities and management difficulties, and it was difficult to supply originals such as original samples presented as above. Moreover, the Defendant and the Defendant had no intent or ability to supply originals of quality such as sampling, which was presented to the victim even after receiving money from the injured party as advance payment, because the financial standing of the Defendant and the Defendant’s company was extremely deteriorated due to excess of liabilities.

On October 25, 2012, the Defendant received 75,000 US dollars from the damaged party to the K’s bank account under the name of H on October 25, 2012, and 75,000 US dollars from the Jeju bank account under the name of D corporation to the Jeju bank account under the name of D corporation.

Accordingly, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received the sum of USD 150,000 (the sum of USD 170,000,000).

2. Determination

A. The finding of guilt in a criminal trial ought to be based on evidence of probative value, which leads a judge to have a conviction that is beyond a reasonable doubt, to such a degree that the facts charged are true. Therefore, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof is not sufficiently enough to achieve such conviction, the defendant, even if there are suspicions of guilt.