The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the gist of the grounds of appeal (misunderstanding of facts) and the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor, at the time when the Defendant borrowed the instant money, the Defendant was under the name of the Defendant’s appearance.

The right to collateral security for F apartment was promised to establish the right to collateral security for the victim, and it was lent KRW 148 million to the victim.

At that time, the establishment of F apartment mortgage was objectively impossible, and the defendant did not have sufficient capability to pay the above KRW 148 million.

Therefore, despite the fact that the criminal intent of defraudation by the accused is sufficiently recognized, the judgment of the court of first instance is erroneous in the misconception of the fact that it is not sufficient to prove the crime as stated in its reasoning.

2. Examining the evidence in light of the records, a thorough examination of the records reveals that the first instance court cannot be deemed as a principal in the loan transaction of this case between the Defendant and the victim. In addition, the Defendant did not have the intent of repayment or ability of repayment at the time of the loan transaction of this case.

Therefore, the judgment of not guilty on the ground that there is no proof of a crime is just and there is a violation of law by mistake of facts as alleged by the prosecutor.

subsection (b) of this section.

3. If so, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.