The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor to the summary of the grounds for appeal, the fact that the defendant had the criminal intent to obtain fraud at the time of committing the instant crime can be fully recognized.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The finding of conviction ought to be based on evidence with probative value, which leads a judge to have a conviction that is sufficient to have a reasonable doubt that the facts charged are true. Thus, if there is no such evidence, even if there is doubt of guilt against the defendant, it is inevitable to determine the defendant as the benefit of the defendant. The same applies to the finding of the criminal intent, which is a subjective element of fraud.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Do659 Decided May 10, 2012). The lower court: (a) appears to have served a dry field or warehouse satisfy at Jeju-do with the borrowed money from the victim to have been supplied to the Franchisium corporation, J, K, L, M, agricultural company massage Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “satisfy”) in Jeju-do; (b) the Defendant, around 2012-2013, operated K in his/her own name; (c) the husband’s husband’s husband’s name; (d) the total annual sales amount of each of the above meetings reported to the competent tax office was at least one billion won; (c) the Defendant did not appear to have been able to have sold money from the victim’s affiliate; and (d) the Defendant did not appear to have been able to have made up for the total sales amount of money from the victim’s affiliate; and (d) the Defendant did not appear to have been able to have sold walsatfy.