The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of the gist of the grounds for appeal, the court below acquitted the defendant of the facts charged in this case, although the defendant could sufficiently be recognized that he had taken the initiative of deceiving the victim even though he did not merely lent money from the victim by E and did not have the intent and ability to repay the money, the court below acquitted the defendant of the facts charged in this case.

2. Determination

A. The intent of the crime of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of the crime of fraud, is to be determined by comprehensively taking into account the objective circumstances, such as the Defendant’s financial history, environment, details and details of the crime, and the process of transaction, insofar as the Defendant does not make a confession. Meanwhile, the recognition of guilt ought to be based on evidence with probative value sufficient to cause a judge to have a reasonable doubt that the facts charged are true, so long as there is no such evidence, even if there is suspicion of guilt against the Defendant, it is inevitable to determine it as the benefit of the Defendant. The same applies to the recognition of the criminal intent, which is a subjective

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do6659, May 10, 2012). B.

According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the defendant worked as an accounting employee of the construction company E and lent the name of the business operator to E to operate the H apartment construction business at the E's request, and E seems to have been well aware of the company's financial situation by participating in the company's business affairs, such as operating the restaurant at the building that received in lieu of the construction payment claim, etc. The complainant F also became aware of the company's financial situation through the defendant and started money transactions with E. The defendant around the time when the complainant lent the amount of KRW 30 million to the above company's accounting day.