사기
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. According to the summary of the grounds for appeal, although the defendant could be found to have received money by deceiving the victim as stated in the facts charged, the court below acquitted the defendant of the facts charged in this case. Such judgment of the court below is erroneous by misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles, which affected the conclusion
2. Determination:
A. The lower court determined that, in light of the following circumstances: (a) as to the facts charged in this case where the Defendant acquired a total of KRW 57,824,650 from February 28, 2008 to February 27, 2012 by deceptioning KRW 57,824,650 from the victim on 13 occasions, the Defendant continued to operate a real estate brokerage office from the time of the first borrowing in light of the legal doctrine as seen earlier; (b) on September 26, 2012, the Defendant repaid a total of KRW 3,1610,00 in interest and part as principal; and (c) the victim, even though he was aware that the financial condition of the Defendant is not good, was insufficient to recognize the facts charged against the Defendant; and (d) the Defendant was acquitted on the grounds that there is no evidence to acknowledge
B. In addition to the legal principles and the reasoning of the judgment of the court below properly explained by the court below, the defendant denies the criminal intent by defraudation from the investigative agency, the defendant was living in the apartment at the time of the first loan with the previous wife, and there was no monthly rent (in the investigation record No. 84), the real estate game was good from August 201 (in the investigation record No. 203), the security deposit of the real estate brokerage office is about KRW 10 million, the security deposit of the real estate brokerage office is about KRW 60 million, and the premium is about KRW 60 million (in the investigation record No. 209 of the investigation record), and the victim stated that it is difficult for the defendant to lend a little amount of time due to high interest rate (the trial record No. 104 of the trial record). In full view of the above, it is justified that the court below's measures that acquitted the defendant on the ground that there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge the facts charged of this case, and it is also justified by the prosecutor.