특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(사기)
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual errors and legal scenarios) and F, the victim, consistently made a statement from the investigative agency to the original trial court to the criminal investigation agency to consistently obtained the fraud from the defendant, and the related persons of this case, such as S, ABR, AC, T, etc., consistently stated that the defendant committed the act of deception as stated in the facts charged of this case, and the victim lost against the representative of the transaction company (the defendant borrowed money from the defendant), such as the defendant or H (the mother of the defendant), was not submitted evidence. It is because the written statement (the evidence No. 27 and the evidence No. 102 page) prepared to the purport that the defendant recognizes his own crime, without any force or deceptive scheme, is sufficient to recognize the fact that the defendant acquired the money by deceiving the victim, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts of this case or by misapprehending the rules of evidence.
2. Determination
A. The summary of the facts charged stated that “Around October 2009, the Defendant, who was working as a purchasing team employee of Company G (hereinafter “G”) operated by the Victim F, purchased large volume of fishery products directly in a foreign country and then sold them to the customer, can be viewed as profits.”
However, the Defendant had the victim deposit money with the bank account operated by the Defendant’s mother, K, L operated by the K, M, N, etc., and thought that it would be leased to H, J, L, and N, the representative of each of the following companies, who was returned through several bank accounts, on the condition of 5% interest per month, and there was no intent or ability to conduct the distribution business as the Defendant was the end.