A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On July 25, 2011, the Defendant would produce the victim’s “D” office operated by the victim C in Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, in the amount of KRW 60 million.

As down payment, 20 million won is purchased on the face of main materials and progress production, and it is possible to supply painting machinery by August 25, 201.

“.....”

However, in fact, the Defendant, from the beginning, was planning to receive down payment from the injured party and use it as living expenses, etc., and at the time, there was no funds to use it for the manufacture of painting machinery, so there was no intention or ability to deliver it after manufacturing the seal machinery promised to the injured

On July 26, 201, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim and deceiving the victim, received money of KRW 20 million from the E company bank account used by the Defendant as the contract deposit for the manufacture of machinery from the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. A statement of the police statement in relation to F’s partial statement of the Defendant’s legal witness F on the legal statement of the F, 【The Defendant was actually making a painting machine for the victim and paying the down payment to the victim, but failed to additionally raise funds for the Defendant’s failure to do so, such as receiving money from the Defendant’s obligation, and there was no intention to obtain money from the damaged person.

The argument is asserted.

On the other hand, the intention of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of fraud, should be determined by comprehensively taking into account the objective circumstances such as the Defendant’s financial history, environment, details of the crime, process of transaction, and relationship with the victim before and after the crime, unless the Defendant is led to the confession (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2017Do20682, Aug. 1, 2018). Comprehensively taking into account the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the Defendant entered into a contract with the victim on July 25, 201, and entered into an agreement with the victim to produce and set a seal machine amount of KRW 60,000,000,000, which is a down payment