Rather, according to the statements made by the victim and D in the investigative agency, from the perspective of the victim and D, if the defendant secure business funds as a considerable financial power, they expect that they will be able to participate in the above business if they make an investment in the defendant, and that they have lent money to the defendant.

Therefore, it is found that the defendant was guilty of deceiving the victim and receiving money from the victim in spite of the victim's intention or ability to participate in the above business by purchasing the high-priced self with the borrowed money from the beginning and using the difference acquired by selling it as the initial capital.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the charged facts of this case is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The lower court determined as follows.

The key issue of the instant case is whether the Defendant received money from the victim as if the Defendant would subsequently participate in the hotel business to be promoted by the Defendant, and there are statements from the victim and D as evidence submitted by the Prosecutor, the result of the appraisal by the Korean High Art Association, and the details of the use of checks. However, the above evidence alone is that the Defendant would allow the victim to participate in the hotel business to be promoted by the Defendant.

of this case, the Corporation received money from

It is difficult to see that there was a certification of the criminal intent of deception or fraud by the defendant.

shall not be deemed to exist.

B. 1) Recognition of criminal facts in a criminal trial is a judge.