The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor to the summary of the grounds for appeal, the defendant is fully recognized that the defendant, as if he built a house with the investment money received from the damaged person without the intent to invest his own fund, and then paid off the construction cost, he had the share acquired by deceiving the victim by means of money and by receiving the money, as he had invested half

Even so, the lower court erred by misapprehending the fact that the lower court acquitted the Defendant of the instant facts charged, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. In addition to the facts acknowledged by the evidence adopted by the lower court, the lower court calculated the total construction cost of the above loan as KRW 56520,000 (excluding rental fees) based on the unit price for the construction project stipulated in the contract in this case, and the Defendant spent the market price of the loan in this case, based on the following circumstances:

In light of the fact that the construction cost stated in the construction permit and the completion certificate as to the loan of this case is less than 824 million won, which is the amount close to the total construction cost claimed, and that the amount of each construction cost stated in the above construction permit and completion certificate as to the loan of this case is less than 50 million won, the defendant at least appears to have used the above loan of this amount exceeding the construction cost stated in the above construction permit and completion certificate, and (3) the defendant is likely to have used the above loan of this amount exceeding the construction cost stated in the above construction permit and completion certificate, and is more likely to have used the above loan of this case compared to the local business operator due to lack of relevant information and limitation of communication ability.