The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Although the summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error and the misapprehension of the legal principle) can be recognized that the defendant had no ability to repay or intent to repay, the court below found the defendant not guilty of the facts charged in this case due to the lack of such intent.

2. Determination

A. The judgment of the court below is based on the following points: (a) the Defendant and the victim had a relationship with the victim at the time of borrowing money as stated in the facts charged; (b) the victim did not seek the return of the principal and interest of the loan despite the occurrence of the cause for loss of profit under the monetary loan certificate prepared by the Defendant; and (c) the victim was fully aware of the fact that the Defendant had incurred a debt difficult to cope with the sales of the company run at the time of borrowing money, in light of the purpose of borrowing money stated in the above loan certificate, such as tax payment or repayment; (c) even according to the victim’s assertion, the victim appears to have lent money with a certain portion of the funds of the Defendant’s parents; (iv) the Defendant’s attachment after the commencement of the investigation of the instant case, was able to repay part of the above loan money to the Defendant; and (v) it is difficult to view that the Defendant had access to the Defendant’s money from the beginning to obtain money from the victim regardless of marriage; and (vi) it seems difficult to deem that the Defendant’s act constitutes a fraudulent act or behavior in light of social norms.