The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that, in light of the amount of the obligation described in the written statement submitted by the defendant at the time of filing a petition for personal bankruptcy, the defendant did not have the intent or ability to repay the money from the victims. Thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts against the rules of evidence.

2. According to the records of the judgment on the grounds of appeal of this case, the victims were working in the same industry as the defendant, and were aware of the company size and situation of the defendant while making transactions with the defendant for a considerable period of time, the defendant knew of the situation where the company operation funds were needed at the time of borrowing, used the money received from the victims as actual business funds, and maintained business for a considerable period of time by investing the business funds as above. From May 3, 2005 to November 201 when the defendant applied for personal bankruptcy, interest was paid to the money borrowed from H during the period from January 27, 2008 to November 27, 2009, and there is no reasonable doubt that there was a violation of the rules of evidence by the prosecutor. We find that the judgment of the court below is justified and it is hard to find that there was no objective evidence that the defendant had urged the payment of the principal or interest until the victims were urged.