The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error) stated that the Defendant had a claim of KRW 13 million against the F, but the F was unable to pay money to the D Ecoos car (hereinafter “the instant vehicle”) that he was on board the ordinary course of the appeal, and obtained the borrower’s permission, and thus, he was granted a loan to use the instant vehicle as collateral and provided the instant vehicle to G with money and provided the instant vehicle, and as such, it did not deceiving E to lend KRW 4 million if the instant vehicle was offered as collateral, as shown in the facts charged in the instant case, to E, and there was no change in fact at the time of the investigation. However, the Defendant did not have filed the aforementioned change at the time of the investigation. Although the above change was inconsistent with the statement made by the investigative agency and thus, it did not have credibility, the judgment of the court below erred by misapprehending the fact that the Defendant’s fraudulent change was not guilty as to the facts charged in this case, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below after comparing it with the records, the court below's determination of evidence as follows: (i) in the court below's decision, Eul provided F, not the defendant, with the payment of money when intending to borrow additional 4 million won from the defendant; (ii) in the court below's decision that "F, with the demand of the defendant, belongs to himself/herself in a debt relationship between the defendant and F, and corresponding to the defendant"; and (iii) in the statement of H, "I knew that the vehicle of this case is about 12 million won against E," that "I would know that the vehicle of this case was paid to the defendant about 12 million won from F," the statement of G also conforms to the defendant's defense; (iii) the reason why the defendant delivered the vehicle of this case to the defendant; and (v) whether the defendant obtained the loan of this case from G with the consent of F.