The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor (misunderstanding of facts) is proved to have proved that the defendant had a criminal intent to obtain fraud.

In addition, it was judged that there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, and the innocence was pronounced.

However, in light of the victim and M's statement in the court below and the investigative agency, the statement in the confirmation document prepared by the defendant, the details of deposit account transactions, investment funds and the source of borrowing, etc., there was a criminal intent to acquire by fraud against the defendant.

It is reasonable to view it.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant is erroneous by mistake.

2. Summary of the facts charged in this case and the judgment of the court below

A. The summary of the facts charged in this case is the representative of the E which carries on the domestic medical tourism business of Chinese people.

1) On April 29, 2016, the Defendant, at the above company office located in Seocho-gu Seoul Government F and 1007 around April 29, 201, would allow the victim G to export the ginseng and the plant of the Simnsan to China.

In this regard, the cost of business promotion, the cost of issuing the PEP (ecological origin certificate) is required, and the victim and the above-mentioned pharmaceutical products entered into a contract on the export of China.

However, even if the defendant entered into a contract for the export of medicinal materials with the victim, the defendant did not have the ability or intent to obtain a PEP (a certificate of ecological origin) or export the medicinal materials to China.

The Defendant received KRW 20 million from the damaged party, around April 30, 2016, via the Agricultural Cooperative Account (H) in the name of the Defendant, KRW 30 million around May 24, 2016, and KRW 30 million on May 27, 2016, respectively.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

2) On May 12, 2016, the Defendant borrowed a loan amount of KRW 50 million from the victim of the above office around May 12, 2016 to the extent that the Defendant borrowed KRW 50,000,000 from the victim of the above office “if the funds are insufficient to operate the medical tourism business in Korea to Chinese people, the principal and interest shall be KRW 4.5 million until November 12, 2016.