사기
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The gist of the prosecutor’s appeal is that the court below acquitted the charged facts of this case on the grounds that there is no proof of the crime. However, despite the credibility of the E’s statement, it is sufficient to recognize the facts charged, the court below rejected E’s statement without reasonable grounds, and the court below erred by misapprehending the rules of evidence, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2. The judgment of the court below held that the defendant borrowed a sum of KRW 423 million from the complainant E to November 8, 2006 at the interest rate of KRW 4,00,000,000 per month. However, while most of the principal and interest have not been repaid, the defendant borrowed an additional loan of KRW 20,000,000 (hereinafter "the loan of this case") on May 30, 2008. However, the fact that the defendant failed to repay the loan of this case until the date of the closing of the argument of this case is acknowledged in the record.
However, the Defendant borrowed KRW 20 million to the complainant on June 11, 2008, and KRW 25 million on August 11, 2008, as well as KRW 2500,000,00,000 from June 2, 2008 to May 8, 2009, paid KRW 200,000 agreed interest on a monthly basis except for interest on October 2, 2008 (not more than 190 pages of investigation record). The Defendant borrowed the instant loan from H and 8 and received promissory notes as collateral (hereinafter “the investigation record”) after borrowing KRW 25,00,00,00 from the investigative record to July 18, 208, and the Defendant borrowed the loan from 30,000,000 won to 25,000,000,000 won prior to the collection of the loan claims (hereinafter “the instant loan-related documents”). Meanwhile, the Defendant borrowed the instant loan-related documents from the Chairperson.