All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. On December 6, 2017, the Defendant did not submit a statement of reason for appeal within 20 days, the due reason for appeal, even though he/she received a notice of receipt of the record of trial from this court on December 6, 2017. The Defendant’s petition of appeal submitted by the defense counsel of the lower court on November 10, 2017 does not indicate the reason for appeal, and there is no reason for ex officio investigation even after examining the record.

2. Determination on the prosecutor’s appeal

A. According to the summary of the grounds for appeal (not guilty part of the judgment below’s reasoning), the Defendant, although he knew or could have known that G did not have the ability to employ the victim D, can find the fact that G acquired it by acquiring five million won from the victim.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the fraud is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

B. Determination 1) The lower court, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by various evidence, such as Defendant, K, and D’s legal statement in the lower court, has the ability to provide G with employment.

Recognizing the Defendant’s argument that the Defendant believed, the sole evidence submitted by the Prosecutor alone was proved without reasonable doubt as to the fraud in the facts charged in the instant case.

It determined that the fraud was not guilty on the ground that it could not be said that it was false.

① The Defendant was able to say that G was a member of the J University president at the time when G was a member of the National Assembly, and that G was a member of the J University’s event society, and that G was in the position of having influence on the personnel decision-making by the Center, as G was found in the Center’s office and continued to visit G.

Doctrine

statement.

② At the same time as the victim was introduced by the defendant, Kdo requested G to work at the center at the same time as the victim showed that G was a society at the local L event where the politician attended, and as the defendant and the center office met G, he/she is employed at the center.