The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below that acquitted the defendant on this part of the facts charged on the ground that the defendant concluded a contract for construction work with the victim C without intent and ability to pay the construction cost in time and had the victim progress the construction work, but did not prove the victim and the amount of damage.

B. On September 16, 2009, when the defendant created a collateral security on the land, such as Young-gun G, etc. (hereinafter “instant land”), the defendant was found not guilty of this part of the charges on the ground that it is clear that the defendant had no intent and ability to pay the construction cost to the victim E from the beginning of May, 2009, and as long as E has paid a considerable amount of construction cost, it is difficult to recognize the criminal intent of defraudation, and it is difficult to readily conclude that E is a victim.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged 1) The defendant tried to establish and operate a machinery manufacturing plant, etc. over several occasions from around 1992 to 2008, but failed to perform all the projects and had no special occupation. Around October 2008, the defendant borrowed KRW 150 million from a financial institution to a bad credit holder and registered as a bad credit holder. (2) The defendant against the victim C was in an economic difficult situation, such as being registered as the victim's bad credit holder. (2) On May 2009, the new construction site of the Gangwon-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Corporation in D, the victim "(ju), the construction cost of KRW 120 million,140,000,000,000,0000,000,000 won, and the construction cost of the construction would have been entrusted to D, and if the construction work is completed, the defendant would receive a loan from a small and medium enterprise fostering bank within 15 days."