The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of the gist of the grounds for appeal, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant has a criminal intent to obtain fraud.

The judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous.

2. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined in the lower court’s judgment, it is recognized that the Defendant purchased the instant vessel from D on February 14, 2012 in KRW 150 million and paid KRW 50 million out of the purchase price on November 2012 even if the vessel was delivered, and that the remainder of KRW 100 million was not paid.

However, according to the records, the Defendant acquired the right to collect a steering gear of 500 tons from the Russian government before purchasing the instant vessel, and the Defendant acquired the right to collect a steering gear of 500 tons from Russia to D on February 14, 2012, and explained that the instant vessel is necessary for operation, and requested the captain of the instant vessel to directly operate the instant vessel. The purchase price of the instant vessel was agreed to pay the vessel between Russia and May 6, 2012, when it was anticipated that the vessel will enter one lane of the instant vessel, and the Defendant, upon D’s request, sent KRW 25 million at the repair cost of the instant vessel before purchasing the instant vessel to Russia, was employed by the Defendant as the captain of the instant vessel, and the Defendant, upon being employed by the Defendant on April 2, 2012, was aware that the vessel would have been under the direct control of the vessel from 200,000 to 25,000.