사기
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds of appeal is that the defendant received a total of KRW 37,30,00 from 7 financial institutions including each of the loans in this case on the day before and on the same day, and did not repay the loans once, and the charge of violating the Customs Act was already occurred prior to and after each of the loans in this case, and only after investigation was conducted, despite the fact that the defendant acquired the loans in this case without the intention or ability to repay as stated in the facts charged, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant on the basis of the defendant's statement is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts.
2. Determination
A. On November 23, 2012, the Defendant: (a) under Article 244-22 of Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Mapo-gu, Seoul, and Article 244-22, the Defendant provided, through the intermediary of the Victim Korea Savings Bank, “The Defendant shall pay KRW 305,750,00,000, including interest and principal, for one year, if he/she loans KRW 3 million.” However, the Defendant already received an excessive amount of debt from financial institutions due to start-up loans, school loans, credit card loans, etc.; and (b) the Defendant did not have the intent and ability to repay even if he/she borrowed money due to no certain amount of income. The Defendant received three million won immediately from the victim; and (c) on November 23, 2012, the Defendant received the money from the victim; and (d) on November 23, 2012, the Defendant paid KRW 305,750,000,0000 to the employees of the Victim Savings Bank, etc.
However, the defendant was granted a loan of 37,30,000 won at the 7th financial institutions at the time, and the Korea Technology Finance Corporation has a debt of 50,000,000 won and there was no intention or ability to repay the debt even if he received a loan from the victim
The Defendant loans from the victim, i.e., the victim.