The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The decision of the court below that found the Defendant guilty of fraud, although the Defendant did not deception the victim as stated in the facts charged of this case, is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the establishment of fraud.

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the ex officio judgment prosecutor.

In the trial of the court below the prosecutor's charge against the defendant

B. (1) An application for amendment to a bill of amendment was filed as stated in paragraph (1) and this court permitted it, and thus the subject of the judgment below was no longer maintained. The Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, even though there was a ground for ex officio reversal as seen above. (b) On November 8, 2016, the Defendant in the facts charged at the victim C business office located in Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, 2016, submitted the above application form with a new share of the victim’s new share of KRW 4.9% and interest rate of KRW 1,035,39 on the security of the said vehicle to the employees of the victim who purchased the new share of the victim’s new share of KRW 4.9%, 60-month, 1,035,399, which was kept there was a good faith payment of KRW 200,000,000.

However, the Defendant resided in the rental apartment with the monthly rent of KRW 30,000,000 and did not have a certain occupation. On March 17, 2015, the Defendant was liable to pay KRW 74,000 for the installments of the vehicle with the loan received from D on February 4, 2016, while purchasing two vehicles from D on February 4, 2016. Furthermore, the Defendant paid KRW 11,20,000,000 for the first installment of the instant car on four occasions, and further, made installment in the state of economic deterioration as it is impossible to pay the registration tax for the instant car.