The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In full view of the summary of the grounds for appeal (fact-finding) D and F’s testimony at the court below, the court below found the defendant not guilty on the grounds that there is no evidence to acknowledge the criminal intent to acquire the defendant, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts.

2. Determination

A. Around October 6, 2011, the Defendant entered into a contract for remodeling construction of the housing owned by the victim D and the victim in YY-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, the summary of the facts charged of the instant case with the purport that “The Defendant will complete the construction until October 23, 2011, commencing construction around October 7, 201” with the victim to the effect that “The construction cost shall vary to 26 million won.”

However, even if the defendant receives the payment for the work from the victim, he did not have the intention or ability to do the above work for the victim.

As above, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim and deceiving the victim from the victim on October 10, 201, received 10 million won as the down payment from the victim on or around October 10, 201, and 10 million won as the intermediate payment around October 21, 201, and 20 million won as the intermediate payment.

B. The judgment of the court below is based on the following facts: (a) with respect to the criminal intent of defraudation by the defendant, the court below started construction work with D, as described in the facts charged in the case of this case, after taking into account all the legal statements and evidence of the following: (b) with regard to the criminal intent of defraudation by the defendant, the defendant entered into a contract for remodeling construction with D, as described in the facts charged of this case; (c) waste removal work (transporting one ton truck at least once per ton); (d) waste removal work (construction work at the end of the construction site of this case after the defendant was employed by the defendant) and G (the business operator who carried out interior works at the construction site of this case); (e) removal and cement work at the end of the construction site of this case; (e) removal and cement work at least once per ton; and (e) removal and cement work at the end of the construction site of this case; and (e) removal and cement work at the end of the construction site of this case.