The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the evidence of this case, such as the statement of the victim in the summary of the grounds for appeal, etc., the defendant could be recognized as deceiving the victim even though he did not have the intent and ability to supply the victim with 100,000 Macact, so the court below found the defendant not guilty of the facts charged of this case, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant, from May 20, 2016, engaged in the manufacturing business of cosmetics since around May 20, 2016, and the victim C is a person engaged in the wholesale and retail business of cosmetics with the trade name D.

On September 13, 2017, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant has a place of 100,000 Macact, which was completed, and sold at KRW 25,00,000” to the victim in a factory leased and used by Pyeongtaek-si E.

However, the Defendant did not have a completed 10,000 macact and did not intend to continuously avoid being requested by the victim. At the time, the Defendant Company B continued to pay approximately KRW 48,60,000,000 to employees and did not pay KRW 8,000,000,000 for commuting bus operation due to the fact that the Defendant had continued to be in a proper state. Around that time, around June 22, 2017, it was not clear whether the decision to commence voluntary sale of the housing site members of the Suwon District Court, which was essential for the production of Mcact, could continuously produce Mcact because the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to produce Mcact to the victim even if receiving the payment from the victim.

As above, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 25 million from the victim to the Agricultural Cooperative Account in the name of No. 2, 2017, and acquired it by deceiving the victim.

B. The lower court determined as follows. The lower court duly adopted and investigated and identified the following.