beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal consistently from the investigative agency to the court of the court below’s trial, the victim D lent KRW 50 million from the loan to the Defendant on March 26, 2015, and at the time of the next use, it was entirely unaware of the fact that the construction site of the instant building was subject to a disposition to revoke the construction permit and an order to remove the building from the creative viewing, and it is possible for the Defendant to repay the building after the month.
This is to lend money in trust and trust.
In full view of the statements of the victim, whether the defendant was engaged in the affairs related to the viewing of creative sources, relevant evidentiary materials, and written ruling of the administrative adjudication committee in Gyeongnam-do, etc., the defendant could be sufficiently recognized that the defendant deceivings the victim as stated in the facts charged and defrauds the victim KRW 50 million, as well as evidence of the facts charged. However, the court below is insufficient to prove the facts charged.
The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty of the charges on the grounds that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize the fact that the Defendant actively induceds the victim with the intent to acquire by deception, in full view of the facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated.
The judgment below
Examining the reasoning in comparison with the records, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no sufficient and sufficient circumstance and evidence that clearly oppose the finding of the facts by the court below in the trial, and even if the evidence submitted by the prosecutor is based on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, it is not sufficient to recognize that this part of the facts charged is proven without reasonable doubt. Thus, there is an error of law of misunderstanding as alleged by the prosecutor in the judgment of the court below.
subsection (b) of this section.
Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is not accepted.
3...