I have no idea what you are saying. It is not a complicated concept that a person needs to pay for living expenses on an ongoing basis. It is also not a complicated concept to expect a person to not be able to use all of their income to go towards a loan.
Is it possible that Hhampuz is in a position where they are not the ones paying for all/most of their living expenses?
If you are looking for an excuse for saying Hhampuz is innocent, then sure, his landlady actually pays him for living where he lives. Realistically, looking at the blockchain around his known addresses and other public information, I can confidently say this is not the case.
If Hhampuz wants to go on the record to say that he has no/few living expenses, or some other excuse others have offered for him, he is free to do so. If he does make this kind of assertion, unless there is evidence to the contrary, it would be unreasonable to not accept it as fact, however without the assertion coming from him, the mere possibility falls outside of the scope of reasonable doubt. If he were to make an assertion in his defense that is shown to be untrue, he would be shown to have lied, and it would be additional evidence he is trying to cover up what actually happened.
Also
The loan is only evidence of a motive. There is blockchain evidence to support the underlying accusation that remains true regardless of motive.