사기
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (based on factual errors and misapprehension of legal principles) is unclear as to whether the agreement amount of traffic accident will be deposited within 15 days, and in the absence of any method of repayment in the event that the agreement amount of traffic accident does not enter, the Defendant borrowed money from the victim by making a conclusive promise of full payment within 15 days. Therefore, there was a criminal intent of defraudation.
2. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the lower court is justifiable to have determined that: (a) the evidence submitted by the public prosecutor alone is insufficient to sufficiently prove that the Defendant had the scope of deception to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt on the part of the Defendant, taking account of the following: (b) the Defendant’s wife was actually in a bus prior to borrowing KRW 5 million from the Defendant’s wife on November 201, 2013; (c) the Defendant received a traffic accident agreement from the bus transport association around May 15, 2014; and (c) there is no reason for delaying the receipt of the agreement amount.
3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.