Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of the Defendant’s borrowing of money from the victims due to a shortage of company funds, the Defendant thought that the Defendant would pay the victims the borrowed money with the proceeds from the sale of the goods after receiving a considerable amount of orders from the clients at the time of the borrowing of money from the victims. However, unlike the expected expectation, the clients failed to perform the promise, thereby failing to pay the victims the borrowed money properly.

Therefore, it cannot be deemed that there was an intentional intent to borrow money from the victims even though there was no intent or ability to repay the borrowed money to the defendant at the time.

B. According to the prosecutor (1) misunderstanding of facts (as to the acquittal part), victim C, witness N, and M's statement in each investigation agency, although the defendant could sufficiently be recognized that the defendant deceptioned the victim C as stated in this part of the facts charged and acquired the above 50 million won by deceiving the victim C as stated in this part of the facts charged, the defendant rejected the credibility of the above investigation agency's statement and, rather, acquitted the victim C and witness N on this part of the facts charged on the basis of the reversal statement in each of the original trials of the victim C

(2) The sentence of unfair sentencing (two years of suspended sentence in October) by the lower court is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts

A. The intent of the crime of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of the crime of fraud, shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the objective circumstances, such as the Defendant’s financial history, environment, details of the crime, and the process of performing transactions before and after the crime, insofar as the Defendant does not make a confession. The intent of the crime is not definite intention, but dolu

I would like to say.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2008Do11718 Decided April 9, 2009, etc.). B.

In light of the above legal principles, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as follows.