The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The complainant entered into a contract with the defendant to lend money under the name of the purchase price of 61,691m2 (hereinafter “the instant loan for consumption”) in Gwangju-si, Gwangju-si, Gwangju-si (hereinafter “the instant land”). Even if the Defendant and the complainant entered into a loan certificate on February 22, 2017, the loan amount should be used as the purchase fund of the instant land. Although the loan certificate has been repreparation, the defendant is recognized not to change such terms and conditions; the complainant borrowed money from the beginning for the purpose of purchasing the instant land, but used it for other purposes; the complainant borrowed money from the beginning; the defendant used it as services related to development of the instant land of KRW 14,691m2 (hereinafter “the instant land”); and the remaining KRW 110,000,000,000,000,000,000 from the complainant, the defendant did not sufficiently inform the defendant that he/she was using the instant land for the purpose of development of the instant land; in light of the fact that he/she did not mislead the respondent.

Nevertheless, the court below acquitted the charged facts of this case on different premise, and the judgment of the court below erred by mistake of facts.

Judgment

The court below, under the title of "2. Judgment of the court below", stated the grounds in detail, lent money to the defendant in order for the complainant to purchase a commercial building newly constructed on the land of this case in the court below, and the defendant entered into a loan agreement of this case.