beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. At the time of the summary of the grounds for appeal, the Defendant did not have any property owned by him, while the amount of the bill debt was considerably high, and the employee’s monthly wage was unable to pay it properly. In light of these circumstances, it is recognized that the Defendant deceivings the victim and acquired money.
Therefore, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2. Determination
A. A. Around April 2012, the summary of the facts charged in the instant case, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim E, a stock company run by the Defendant in Pakistan, stating, “If the Defendant supplies the raw materials, and pays the price.”
However, at the time, the above company operated by the defendant was faced with difficulties in operating due to the situation immediately preceding the bankruptcy because it was unable to prevent bills of exchange, and since the defendant did not have any particular property, there was no intention or ability to pay the price even if the defendant received goods from the victim.
Accordingly, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, was supplied with the land of KRW 174,071,288, including KRW 47,793,383 around April 2012, KRW 23,400,190 around May 2012, and KRW 102,87,715 around June 2012.
B. The lower court determined that the Defendant continued to be supplied with a site by the victim from December 2, 201 to June 2012, and paid approximately KRW 815,00,000 in total from March 25, 2012; considering the content, timing and process of preparation, transaction of paper, transaction of paper, transaction of bills with the Defendant and the victim’s transaction relationship, etc., it appears that the victim was aware of the fact that the Defendant was economically difficult for the Defendant’s company; part of the other hand notes issued by the Defendant to pay the purchase price was settled; and part of the purchase price was paid from April 201 to June 2012; and even after the payment was defaulted on June 25, 2012.