The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The Defendant is a person who operates D Co., Ltd., a mobile phone agent in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

On July 22, 2013, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The victim E, who consulted with the above agency, can seek a mobile phone device free of charge, will provide a mobile phone device free of charge in the current usage rate system.”

However, since the defendant thought that he had the victim bear the mobile phone price in 24 months, there was no intention or ability to provide the victim with the mobile phone free of charge.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, entered into a contract to change the device on behalf of the SK Telecom Co., Ltd. on the same day as that of the victim, had the victim bear KRW 451,00,000 for the device price, and had the above company gain pecuniary advantage equivalent to the same amount.

2. Determination

A. In a criminal trial, the establishment of a criminal facts ought to be based on strict evidence with probative value, which leads a judge to have a reasonable doubt, and thus, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof does not sufficiently reach the extent that such conviction is to be ensured, the determination should be made with the benefit of the defendant even if there is a doubt of guilt, such as the defendant’s assertion or defense contradictory or uncomfortable dismissal.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do231, Jun. 28, 2012). (B)

However, according to the following circumstances acknowledged by the record, ① according to the application for change of a device prepared by the victim and the defendant at the time of entering the mobile phone of this case, the victim is obligated to pay KRW 451,000 per month to KRW 18,790 per month for 24 months, and the victim bears KRW 22,000 per month for the monthly fixed rate of KRW 85,000 per month.