Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (1) misunderstanding of facts: (a) had the ability to repay money to the victim I at the time of borrowing money; (b) the victim JJ and L have invested in used cars sales business; and (c) did not deceiving the victim I.

② Of the sales proceeds of the Victim B, KRW 20 million was invested in the operation of a special motor vehicle sales business as a partner, and KRW 14 million was deducted from the Defendant’s installment payments, etc. under the agreement with the Victim B, and thus, did not be embezzled.

(2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor (not guilty part) by deceiving the victim L with the same business loan as the facts charged, obtained the loan in his name and forged the document of waiver of the vehicle without consent of the victim L.

2. Determination

A. (1) Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant: (a) operated used cars trading and export business under the name of N and Dong business, Inc. (HAA) around August 201; (b) however, as long as N have not yet passed, it was difficult to operate the company due to a lack of funds; and (c) even though the victim first purchased a large number of insurance policies through the victim I, it did not go beyond KRW 700,000,000,000,000,000 won and 22 million,000,000,000,000 won were borrowed from the victim J to use as the funds for the operation of the company; and (d) the Defendant, without borrowing from the victim L 20,000,000 won and 20,000,000,000 won were borrowed from the victim L by borrowing and borrowing money from the victim.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

(2) The Korean Criminal Procedure Act adopts with respect to the victim B.