Even if the Defendant received money from the injured party by additional statements, such as that it was made in the United States, rather than delivering the content from the injured party as it is, the Defendant had dolusent intent on the fact that the Defendant may not be such remarks at least.

must be viewed.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances that can be recognized by the records of the instant case, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim from E with respect to the function and performance of the instant Nompt, sold the said Nompt North Korea to the victim.

I would like to say.

① In collusion with N, E was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment for committing the crime, such as deceiving the Defendant by deceiving KRW 50 million from the Defendant with the two purchase proceeds of Nowon-gu, by making a false statement that the Defendant “blosts flosts flosts flosts flosts flosts flosts flosts flosts,” while the appeal was dismissed (Supreme Court Decision 2018Da324, 1909 (Joint) Decided August 21, 2018). However, the appeal was dismissed (Seoul District Court Decision 2018No5341, Oct. 17, 2018). ② The Defendant purchased the two North Korean flosts flosts flosts from E around April 2016, and made a claim against E by means of the purchase proceeds of the games.

(3) E may, if a defendant has two or more installments of money on June 2016, be allowed to do so.

Around June 2016, the Defendant paid 28.9 million won in total to E, including the money received from the victim for selling the instant Nowon-gu, around July 2016.

(4) The E shall appear in this court and the defendant purchased two Nomb North Korea in his/her own territory.

was stated.

Therefore, the court below is just in finding the Defendant not guilty of the facts charged in this case, and the prosecutor’s assertion is without merit

3. The Criminal Procedure Act provides that the appeal by the prosecutor of the conclusion is groundless.