The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error) is that part of the funds that the Defendant repaid to the victim, at the Defendant’s request, was paid as the principal and interest for the borrowed money borrowed from another person, and it is not paid as the principal and interest for the borrowed money of this case. Thus, it cannot be readily concluded that the Defendant has no criminal intent to acquire the victim merely because the Defendant paid the amount exceeding twice the principal and interest for the borrowed money of this case. In full view of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the criminal intent of the

2. Determination

A. The lower court determined as follows: (a) based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court: (b) the Defendant paid KRW 199,90,00 to the victim 90 times from April 15, 2013 to October 10, 2016 under the pretext of principal and interest; (c) the amount exceeds twice the loan principal; (d) the amount exceeds the principal and interest calculated with the highest interest rate under the Interest Limitation Act; and (c) the Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant paid interest at a high rate of interest to the Defendant; and (d) the Defendant paid the amount exceeding two times the loan principal from the Defendant, it is merely an internal situation of the victim; and (e) the victim was paid the amount exceeding two times the loan principal from the Defendant, it is difficult to view that the Defendant had obtained a considerable benefit to the victim; and (e) there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

B. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant started to borrow money from many persons in the way of return for the operation of the dan, while the debt increased, the defendant did not have any other property than the danran.