The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine) was delivered on the condition of “Advance payment” and “payment immediately after delivery.”

In full view of the following facts: (a) it is difficult to reject the credibility of the above statement solely on the ground that the conditions of a special transaction have been consistently stated and are not written in the document in light of the continuous transaction relationship; (b) G’s statement has an interest that may be an accomplice depending on the case; (c) it is difficult to believe that the D Co., Ltd. at the time of the instant contract (hereinafter “D”) has the interest to become an accomplice; (d) it is deemed that the liabilities were more than 20 times the capital; (c) the liabilities were serious; and (d) it is deemed that the debtor has the intent to commit fraud by deeming that the liabilities were filed for rehabilitation at only two weeks from the date of the final supply; and (d) the circumstances in which D returned part of the clothing received by the delivery and endeavored to recover damage, such as the repayment of rehabilitation claims, are nothing more than the circumstances after the establishment of fraud, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of this part of the charges

2. Determination

A. Judgment 1 on the primary facts charged is that the defendant is a person who has served as a representative director of D established for the purpose of the business of manufacturing women's clothes.

The Defendant, around June 2012, at the victim F Co., Ltd. office in Gangnam-gu Seoul (hereinafter “victim Co., Ltd.”) located in Gangnam-gu Seoul (hereinafter “victim Co., Ltd”), had his employees G pay 30 percent of the advance payment to H, who is an employee of the Victim Co., Ltd.

In stating that “The instant contract was entered into with the victim company,” and had the victim company enter into the instant contract for clothing supply (hereinafter “instant contract”).

Since then, the defendant could not pay advance payment to the victim company, the defendant would make G around July 2012 to pay the immediate payment to H.

“Fastly false.”

However, from April 2012, D has financial standing.