The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 8,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of the facts) is as follows: (a) although the defendant had no intention to repay, by deceiving the victim, and by borrowing twenty-four million won from the damaged person, the court below acquitted the defendant of the facts charged of this case; (b) and (c) there is

2. Ex officio determination

A. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal to amend indictment.

In the first instance trial, the prosecutor will jointly make the house purchased in China if he/she lends money.

“The interest shall be paid upon lending money and the money shall be repaid.”

“Along with the borrowing of the above money from the injured party, the Defendant did not have any intent to repay it, and there was no intention to have the house in China under the joint name.

“However, even if the Defendant borrowed money from the injured party, the Defendant did not intend to repay the money.”

“Application for Amendments to Bill of Indictment was filed and this Court permitted to do so, so the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained due to changes in the subject of the judgment.

B. Determination of the changed facts charged 1) The defendant and the victim C were living together from around July 2009 after having met through Internet hosting around 2008 and liquidated the living relationship around July 2010.

On April 24, 2010, the Defendant borrowed the amount of KRW 24 million to the victim’s house from the Government-si D and 203 of the Victim’s House from the Government-Si around April 24, 2010. The Defendant also borrowed the amount of money from the Plaintiff to the purchase of the apartment house from the Republic of Korea to the Chinese Government. The Defendant would also repay the money to the Plaintiff.

The phrase “ makes a false statement.”

However, even if the defendant borrowed the above money from the injured party, he did not intend to repay it.

On the same day, the Defendant received 24 million won from the injured party to the Nonghyup Bank account in the name of the Defendant.

2) The Defendant alleged that the Defendant received KRW 24 million from a person who suffered damage at the time when the facts charged are described.