A All appeals filed by the Defendants and prosecutor are dismissed.

A. Defendant A1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles) at the time when the Defendant borrowed money from the victim, the victim was well aware of the situation where the N company (N, hereinafter “N”)’s profit could not occur at the time when the Defendant borrowed money from the victim, but first proposed the lending of money to the Defendant. The Defendant was capable of paying KRW 100 million with income in the course of operating the Ttrade Company, and the Defendant was in dispute between each type AG and AI Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “AI”) and AH, and due to considerable expenses, it was not repaid until now. In light of the fact that there was no intent to obtain money by fraud by the Defendant.

B) The fraud of investment funds related to financial transaction projects with the victim H was only introduced to the victim from X andY, and there was no criminal intent to commit fraud. (2) The content of this part of the facts charged is a mere falsehood that anyone can dissipate the falsity, and thus it cannot be concluded. (3) The Defendant merely introduced the victim to V who conducts counseling activities related to the victim J, and there was no criminal intent to commit fraud since all of the money transferred from the victim was used. (4) The fraud of investment funds related to financial transaction projects with the victim K was also introduced to the victim, and there was no criminal intent to commit fraud. (2) Since anyone of this part of the facts charged is merely a mere falsehood that can dissipate that it is false, it cannot be concluded. (3) Since the content of this part of the facts charged is the actual amount of investment funds in this part, it cannot be acknowledged that the Defendant actually realized the profit of the victim.