The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Suwon District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The summary of the facts charged in this case is as follows.

The Defendant is a representative director of E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “E”) that is a part related to automobiles.

On April 11, 2008, from around June 13, 2008 to around June 13, 2008, the Defendant loaned KRW 870 million from the Victim F to reimburse KRW 350 million due to a temporary shortage of operating funds, and promised to borrow and repay the said borrowed money by taking out as security the land of E (hereinafter “instant land”) and the new factory building on the said land (hereinafter “building”).

However, until August 10, 2007, the Defendant established a collateral security of the maximum amount of KRW 11 billion with respect to the instant land and borrowed KRW 7.25 billion from the Industrial Bank of Korea, the Defendant appraised the instant land and buildings to the Korea Appraisal Board for additional loans on May 29, 2008. However, around May 29, 2008, the instant land was assessed as KRW 6.59,060,000 with respect to the instant land, and KRW 10 billion with respect to the instant building KRW 3.528,948,000 with respect to the instant land.

B. On June 16, 2008, the Industrial Bank of Korea established the right to collateral security of the maximum amount of 11 billion won for the instant building as joint collateral, as well as the land of this case, in order to secure the amount of KRW 7.25 billion for the existing loan around June 16, 2008.

In addition, it is practically impossible to make additional loans because the sales have decreased due to the prolongedization of the automobile's strike and automobile's business, which is the E's place of sales.

Nevertheless, the defendant around August 26, 2008 can provide a security loan to the victim because the building of this case is clean.

All of the money borrowed from the building of this case as security shall be repaid.

By making a false statement to the effect that “”, it received KRW 270 million from the injured party to the E account in the name of E on August 26, 2008, and acquired it by defrauded.

2. The lower court based on its stated reasoning.