The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the court below found the defendant not guilty of the facts charged of this case, but in light of the credibility in the statement of the victim and the J and the fact that the defendant's statement is difficult to believe, the defendant's criminal intent is recognized, so the judgment of the court below is erroneous by misunderstanding facts, which affected

2. On the other hand, the court below made a statement to the effect that the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below on the facts charged of this case: (i) the amount recorded in the facts charged of this case by the defendant was merely a payment of the victim's money; (ii) the amount of money remitted to the victim from May 2012 to April 2013; (iii) the amount of money remitted to the victim from April 2013 to the victim; and (iv) the statement entered in the daily book prepared by the defendant, etc., it is difficult to deem that the victim did not have any money borrowed from the defendant; and (ii) the defendant traded money more than 25 months with the victim; and (iii) the defendant appears to have borrowed money from the victim to the victim after December 9, 2012, which was last borrowed money from the victim; and (iv) the victim and the victim at the time of this case had no money borrowed from the victim at the risk of the defendant's lending to the victim.

Does they lent;

at the home of the mother of the loan.

In addition, the above J’s statement is not consistent, as it stated in the lower court’s witness P’s statement, etc. (No. 174, 175 of the trial record) again, that “the injured party did not lend money to the Defendant” (No. 181 of the trial record), and it is difficult to believe the above J’s statement in light of the lower court’s witness P’s statement, etc., and ④ the Defendant and the injured party.