The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendants, at the time of borrowing money from the victim, committed a deceitful act with regard to the provision of security by means of transfer for corporeal movables and the ability to repay corporeal movables, but the lower court acquitted the Defendant of the charges of this case.

2. Determination

A. A. A prosecutor of the amendment of a bill of amendment: (a) filed an application for the amendment of a bill of amendment to a bill of amendment to a bill of amendment to the indictment with the primary facts charged as seen in Paragraph (2) below, while maintaining the original facts charged in the trial as seen in Paragraph (2) above; (b) this court permitted it; (c) the prosecutor’s primary facts charged are still subject to this court’s trial; (d) the judgment on the grounds for appeal against the prosecutor’s primary facts charged and the judgment on the ancillary facts added in the trial in the first instance trial are also examined. (b) The Defendants requested the victim F to lend money to the Defendant at the end of August 201 while jointly operating the “E” photographer on the first floor of the Jeju Do Office Officetel building, and the victim demanded the payment of real security for the loan, and thus, Defendant A and the victim provided all corporeal corporeal movables (hereinafter “the instant corporeal movables”) to the victim subsequent to Defendant B and the victim as a means of transfer to the victim and agreed to lend 600 million won.

However, in fact, the instant corporeal movables had already been provided by the Defendants to G, who is another creditor, as a collateral for transfer, and there was no intention or ability to acquire the actual collateral value of the instant corporeal movables to the victim by repaying the Defendants’ debt to G, which is a senior mortgagee.

Nevertheless, the Defendants are as above.