beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. 1) As to the fraud against the victim C, D, and E, deeming that the defendant was unaware of the above financing by considering the fact that the money received from the victim was partially used for the funds of the above Organizing Committee, which is against the rule of experience, and that the defendant was fully aware of the intent of the crime of defraudation of the defendant in that the victim would not have borrowed the above money if he had been aware of the operation status of the Organizing Committee at the time. 2) As to the fraud against the victim D, the defendant was not sufficiently capable of self-sufficiency at the time of the AH new construction project, and therefore, the AH owner of the land could be deemed to have failed to proceed with the project because the AH construction project did not proceed more than the supplement procedure of the written consent for land use. Therefore, the criminal intent of defraudation by the defendant is sufficiently recognized.
3) As to the fraud against the victim E, in light of the fact that the defendant was, in fact, jointly and severally with AP, jointly and severally liable for the payment of the posters and invitation letter to the above victim, and that the defendant did not have the ability to raise funds, the criminal intent of deception and deception by the defendant is sufficiently recognized. Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of the above fraud is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts.
2. Determination
A. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty of this part of the charges on the ground that the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor alone, on the grounds of the circumstances stated in its reasoning, cannot be recognized that the Z and AB borrowed money from the victim according to the Defendant’s instruction, and that there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.
The following are acknowledged based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court.