The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, such as the statement, remittance details, and final construction progress of the victim’s statement (misunderstanding of facts), the fact that the Defendant, despite the absence of the intent or ability to conclude the instant new house construction work (including defective repair), by deceiving the victim, received payment of KRW 7,140,00 from the victim for the remainder of the construction work, is sufficiently recognized.

Nevertheless, the court below acquitted the defendant, which is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The lower court’s judgment: (a) the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the facts found based on the following circumstances, namely, ① the Defendant was required to resolve the unpaid construction cost to the previous subcontractor companies that occurred at the said construction site on behalf of F, the former supply and demand of the instant new housing construction project; (b) the Defendant’s use of the remainder of the construction project paid by the victim for the change cannot be readily concluded; (c) the construction project of this case was considerably advanced to the extent that the Defendant’s approval was granted at the time of the receipt of the remainder of the construction project; and (d) the actual fact that the F was omitted from the victim’s position as a supplier of the instant construction project (the time the Defendant received the remainder of the construction project of this case on March 15, 2015, with the payment of construction cost of KRW 15 million (50 million from the total loss incurred in the construction project of this case to KRW 50 million). However, the Defendant’s agreement to pay the remainder to the Defendant at the time of the remainder of the construction project to KRW 100.