All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

2. It is recognized that the Defendant recognized each of the instant crimes and against his mistake; the Defendant sold not only the apartment in his own name, but also the apartment house in his name, the non-foreign vessel, and made considerable efforts to pay damages to the victim, such as transfer of the right to manage the company, and the recovery of the damage was also made to a certain extent; the victim also has an aspect of expanding the damage by making a full investment in the fund without properly grasping the actual operational status of the business proposed by the Defendant, and there is a family member to support the Defendant.

However, although each of the crimes of this case does not have the intent or ability to implement the business proposed by the victim, it is difficult to view that the case is less than 440 million won by deceiving the victim under the pretext of investment or loan, and in light of the Criminal Procedure Act and the degree of damage amount, etc., the defendant asserts that the amount paid for repayment to the victim in the trial court reaches 50 million won in total. However, although it is difficult to believe that the defendant's calculation of repayment amount has a considerable difference from 294 million won recognized by the victim, it is limited to 440 million won in charge, even if the defendant's assertion was accepted in considerable part, and the defendant has already borrowed additional amount of 200 million won from the victim around October 2012 prior to that time, the part of apartment house in the name of the defendant-friendly shipping, the part of apartment house in the name of the defendant-friendly apartment, and the part of apartment house that the defendant provided as security.