The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the following: (a) at the time of the summary of the grounds for appeal (fact-finding) the Defendant’s shares, etc. owned by him were of no value as property; (b) the Defendant cannot be deemed to include the amount to be paid to the victim in a notarial deed of KRW 4.7 billion prepared by I; and (c) Q Q’s statement that the Defendant received an investment of KRW 49.9 million from G is difficult to believe, the facts charged in the

2. Determination

A. Fraud is established on January 22, 2008: (a) fraud is established by deceiving another person to take advantage of mistake and causing a dispositive act; (b) there is causation between deception, mistake, and property disposal act; and (c) on the other hand, whether certain act constitutes deception that causes mistake to another person; and whether there is causation between such deception and property disposal act should be determined generally and objectively by taking into account the transactional circumstances, the other party’s knowledge, character, experience, occupation, and other specific circumstances at the time of such act. Therefore, in a case where the Defendant’s act inducing the victim’s property disposal or such property disposal is conducted under close relation to the failure or performance of any business that the Defendant plans, the existence of deception or causation cannot be determined solely on the basis of the Defendant’s financial power or credit status; (d) the relationship between the victim and the Defendant; (e) the victim’s awareness and involvement in the relevant business; (e) the specific circumstances surrounding the relevant business; and (e) the victim’s success in the relevant business; and (e) the following circumstances acknowledged by the prosecutor’s general and objective evidence.