The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the fact that the defendant, who is not the chairperson of the incorporated association B, conducted the joint venture business of this case unrelated to the purpose of the said corporation as the chairperson of the said corporation, and for the said business, the defendant employed the victim and worked in China even though he did not pay only 300,000 won as a security deposit, and there is no ground to acknowledge the defendant's assertion that the above security deposit was changed to 100,000 won, and the defendant did not pay the total of 37,000 won of the other instructors' wages including the victim, even though he was unable to receive service from the victim, the court below acquitted the defendant of this part of the facts charged otherwise, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. In contrast to the Defendant’s behavior mode of unfair sentencing, method of crime, degree of damage, etc., the lower court’s punishment (five million won of fine) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, first of all, the court below held that the defendant did not have the intention of fraud, and held that the defendant did not have the intention of fraud, and held that the defendant actually engaged in the joint venture project with the He in China and invested expenses, such as security deposit, etc., so the defendant is also deemed to suffer a lot of losses if the project is not properly carried out due to the payment of wages, and the defendant is not recognized to have the motive for not paying wages to the victim from the beginning, and the defendant is not recognized to have paid wages to the victim because he did not give money to the defendant in the H.