The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal: In order to prevent confusion between the parties to the instant loan of KRW 600 million from the Japanese Savings Bank, the term used by the court below shall be reduced and used as it is in the first instance court.

Although it is inappropriate to offer credit to the employees working at a business establishment which did not conduct a due diligence at the time of receiving the actual inspection as security, it is inappropriate to obtain the approval from the upper court, the lower court denied the criminal intent of defraudation by the defendant on the premise that the defendant did not have any awareness of it, which misleads the fact.

In addition, the lower court deemed that false prepaid claims were merely KRW 45,50,000,00,000, but the amount of false prepaid claims should be KRW 64,550,000,00 if the following circumstances are reflected:

In other words, the amount of U’s prepaid credit is limited to KRW 10 million, and the amount of U’s prepaid credit is limited to KRW 20 million, despite the statement made by U’s police, the amount of U’s prepaid credit is limited to KRW 10 million. Thus, there is a false amount of credit equivalent to KRW 10 million.

② The fact that the amount of the prepaid credit against AB is KRW 20 million is clearly recognized by the statement at the court of original instance at the court of original instance at the court of original instance at the court of original instance at the court of original instance at the court of original instance at AB, and the amount of the prepaid credit at the court of original instance at the court of original instance at the court of original instance

③ Ultimately, the amount of false claims amounting to KRW 45 million recognized by the lower court is KRW 1,200,000,000,000,000 for false claims amounting to KRW 6,4.5 million.

Therefore, while the aforementioned false amount of credit as mentioned above is not the proportion of the total amount of credit, the proportion of the amount of the actual amount of credit is not the proportion of the amount of credit, and when calculating the ratio of credit to the amount of credit, the above amount of loan to the above amount of KRW 64.5 million reaches the above amount of KRW 43,630,214, and the personal relationship is sufficiently recognized between the defendant's deception and deception, the court below denied the causal relationship

2. First of all, the evidence of this case is recorded.