Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds of appeal belongs to the defendant as if he commercialized the stock transaction program without commercialization and raises a lot of profits. The defendant prepared to operate the business at the PC (PC) bank without the funds and the office at the time of developing the above program. Even if the above program is commercialized later, it was not clear whether the profit was generated or not, and the defendant actually discontinued the business even after the commercialization of the above program. In addition, the defendant was liable for the debt of KRW 180 million without any specific property at the time, and thus, he did not have the ability to return the investment principal within a certain return date, and the victim was aware of some of the above program and operated the program thereafter, but it was merely an ex post facto effort to recover the investment principal, and thus does not affect the establishment of the crime of fraud itself. In light of the above facts, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles, or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby acquitted the defendant.
2. Determination
A. On July 201, 201, the Defendant stated to the effect that “The Defendant would make a lot of money by developing a program of H.T.S. to the securities company H.S. at a coffee shop located in Dobong-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Seocheon-gu, Seoul, the Defendant would return money if he did not proceed within 10 days from that time on September 26, 201 with the scheduled date for opening the business.”
However, in fact, the defendant developed a share trading program at the time and did not impose a lot of money, but was engaged in the development of the program, but it was not commercialized, and even if commercialized, it was unclear whether there was profit.