The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On January 6, 2015, the Defendant: (a) received Handphone letters from the victim C who sold Bads from the Defendant’s firstman of the same month; and (b) transferred KRW 74,750 to the Defendant immediately, the Defendant, on January 12, 2015, ordered the Defendant to send the said Bads to the victim’s door-to-door transfer.

However, even if the defendant received the above money from the injured party, he did not have the intention or ability to send the hedge money.

The defendant deceivings the victim by the above method and received 74,750 won from the damaged person to the account in the name of the defendant.

2. Around January 6, 2015, the Defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the Defendant provided money to the injured party in response to the request for return of the injured party and returned the hedgings indicated in the facts charged of the purchase. However, since then, the Defendant and his defense counsel did not have contact with the injured party and did not return it to the injured party for the reason that it is detained as a separate crime around February 6, 2015.

3. Determination

A. The burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial is to be borne by a public prosecutor, and the conviction is to be based on evidence with probative value sufficient for a judge to have the truth that the facts charged are true beyond reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no such evidence, even if there is doubt of guilt against the defendant, it is inevitable to determine the defendant as the benefit of the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2001Do2823, Aug. 21, 2001; 2008Do4467, Jul. 24, 2008).

In addition, the defendant is requested to return from the injured party.