beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) at the time when the Defendant received the delivery of a summary of the grounds for appeal from the victim on November 2018, the Defendant was obligated to pay a loan of KRW 400 million to the Credit Guarantee Fund, etc.; (b) KRW 300 million to the customer; and (c) filed an application for corporate rehabilitation against B at the time when one month elapsed from November 2018, the Defendant may fully recognize the intent of defraudation.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the charged facts of this case is erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.
2. Determination
A. The summary of the facts charged in this case is a person who operates an agricultural companyB.
On November 6, 2018, the Defendant made a false call to the victim E, who operates the instant company office operated by the Defendant in the Namyang-si, Gyeonggi-do, by phoneing the Defendant’s wife D through the Defendant’s wife, saying, “The Defendant sent to the Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F building G 4 gamblings. The money will be paid upon completion of delivery.”
However, in fact, the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to pay the amount even if the Defendant received the delivery of the deposit from the victim, because the Defendant did not have any intention or ability to pay the amount even if the Defendant received the delivery of the deposit from the victim, because the Defendant did not have any intention or ability to pay the amount even if the Defendant received the delivery of the deposit from the victim, in the situation that there was approximately KRW 380,000,000 and the amount payable for the transaction amount was approximately KRW 6,300,000,000 monthly interest rate.
Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above and being supplied with 4 gamblings equivalent to KRW 84,00 from November 6, 2018 to December 20, 2018, as indicated in the separate list of crimes, was supplied to the Defendant’s KRW 154,312,00 in total as shown in the separate list of crimes.
In this respect, the defendant deceivings the victim to take property.