The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal: (a) If the victim believed the defendant's horse that the fash period provided as security has more than KRW 40,000,000,000 as security value; (b) if the victim knew that the mortgage was established in the above fash season with 98,00,000 won as security amount, the victim did not lend money as security; and (c) at the time of the instant case, the defendant did not have any particular ability to repay with the defendant, the defendant's deception can be recognized; and (b) even if the victim and H used a car as security and sold it on a large-scale basis, it is difficult to conclude that the victim used a loan as security, regardless of the defendant's ability to repay, the causal relationship between the defendant's deception and the act of disposal by the victim can be acknowledged; and therefore, the court below acquitted the defendant as guilty of the facts charged in this case.

2. Determination

A. The lower court determined that the Defendant, based on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor on the following facts and circumstances, deceiving E as to his ability to repay or the collateral value of the above excavation season.

It is insufficient to recognize that E has carried out an act of disposal by lending money due to an error in this regard, and the facts charged of this case was acquitted on the ground that there is no other evidence to recognize it.

1) E and H (hereinafter “E”)

Although it is argued to the effect that the Defendant was aware of the fact that the secured debt of the mortgage established in the above rupture was already repaid, and that the above rupture had sufficient collateral value, it is difficult to view that E, etc., who had previously lent money as security, had believed only the horses of the Defendant and believed that the above rupture had been repaid, and if so, the above rupture was the secured debt.