The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the gist of the grounds for appeal, the defendant already lost the ability to repay the goods from the victims at the time of receipt of the goods, and knowingly disposed of the goods, and then paid the victims intentionally, who have repaid their obligations to other creditors by so-called return prohibition.

According to this, it is deemed that there exists the intention of deception and fraud necessary for the establishment of fraud as to the facts charged in this case.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and acquitted the Defendant.

2. Summary of the facts charged

A. The victim’s mother or the U.S.A. corporation’s mother and mother are used in the same manner, and the name of another company is omitted.

The defendant in violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) operated D from May 3, 1996, and operated E from June 1, 2002, and suspended the operation of each of the above businesses on July 9, 2012.

Around April 9, 2012, the defendant requested the employee in charge of the victim to supply goods sold by the company operated by the defendant, such as an excessive amount of 116,540 won.

However, because the defendant was faced with a very poor financial situation, even if he was supplied with goods from the victim, he could not settle the price normally.

The Defendant, during April 2012, supplied goods of KRW 241,546,84, KRW 26,191,770, and KRW 39,548, including KRW 131,807,874 during the period of May 2012, KRW 57,857, KRW 184, KRW 139,49,43, and KRW 60,364,832 during the period of June 2012, and supplied goods of KRW 257,771,459 during the period of June 2012, KRW 57,807,874 during the period of June 2012, KRW 139,43, and KRW 60,364,832 during the period of June 2012.