The defendant shall publicly announce the summary of the judgment of innocence.

Around 14:00 on April 11, 2015, the Defendant presented F food vehicles to the victim E at the D High Vehicle Sales Business Place located in Seo-gu Incheon, Seo-gu, Incheon. The Defendant stated that “10% of the 100% of the 14% of the 100% of the 14% of the 14% of the 14:00, and the 14:00,000 won of the 14:0,000 won of the 14:0,000 won of the 14:0

However, in fact, the owner of the above vehicle is a male, and the vehicle was repaired until March 30, 2015 due to the contact accident occurred on or around February 9, 2015, until around March 30, 2015, and the defendant was well aware of the fact of the accident, and the vehicle performance and condition inspection register of the vehicle was stipulated to be indicated in the accident column only "in the case of repair, such as sales, receipt, exchange, etc. on the main structural part of the vehicle". Since there is a considerable difference in the scope of the perception that the general public is an accident, the defendant who intends to sell the above vehicle is the victim of the vehicle without confirming the detailed accident that is the most important factor in the decision to purchase the vehicle, and without verifying the accident history despite the duty to explain it to the victim, the defendant was paid KRW 2,350,000 as the vehicle price for the vehicle from the victim on April 11, 2015.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

Judgment

However, considering the evidence submitted in this Court, it is difficult to view that the following circumstances have been proven even after considering the evidence presented in this Court.

Therefore, it is difficult to view that there was evidence of crime.

1. In full view of the Defendant’s intent to deception, G, E, and H’s respective statements, the Defendant’s “Register of Inspection of the Performance Status of Used Motor Vehicles” of the subject motor vehicle.