The defendant is innocent.

1. Around December 27, 2013, the Defendant stated in the charges that “Around December 27, 2013, the Defendant, while putting the victim D with high-class automobiles, driving the high-class motor vehicle and driving the high-class motor vehicle to the victim D, he/she shall be paid with the loan to the Nnonobya, and he/she shall be paid with three-month interest per month.”

However, in fact, the Defendant has already been liable for several hundred million won, and the interest accrued therefrom was borne by the Defendant, and since the actual owner of the real estate in the name of the Defendant was the husband who is separate from the husband, there was no intention or ability to complete payment even if he borrowed money from the victim because he was planning to transfer the real estate ownership to the husband who is separate from the above husband

As such, the Defendant, from March 6, 2014, received a total of 90,950,000 won from the time when he/she was accused of the victim and received 29,100,000 won from the victim as the borrowed money on the same day, as indicated in the list of crimes, from March 6, 2014.

2. The intent of the crime of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of the judgment of fraud, shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the objective circumstances such as the Defendant’s financial history before and after the crime, the environment, the contents of the crime, and the process of transaction, unless the

(See Supreme Court Decision 90Do1218 delivered on November 13, 1990, etc.). In the instant case, as to whether the Defendant had the intent to commit the crime of defraudation at the time of borrowing each of the instant money, it is not sufficient to recognize the same only by the evidence submitted by the prosecutor on the grounds as examined below, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

First, it cannot be seen that the Defendant did not have sufficient means to repay at the time of borrowing each of the instant loans.

The Defendant’s loan claims amounting to approximately KRW 43 million and KRW 60 million as to automobiles and I, respectively, on the following grounds: E, 232.1 kilometer and its ground buildings; F building No. 406; G apartment No. 202 Dong-si; G apartment No. 904; G apartment No. 202 Dong-gun, Jeoncheon-gun; Hacheon-gun, Hamcheon-gun, Hamcheon-gun; and