The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged is C and C and D are the same children of C.

On August 2012, the Defendant received from D a request from D to grant a loan of KRW 30 million,00,000,000 to KRW 539 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”). At the time, the Defendant was permitted to borrow additional money from D to KRW 10,000,000,000 for personal use. The Defendant used the opportunity to borrow additional money and used the remainder of money, excluding KRW 40,000,000,000,000.

On August 16, 2012, the Defendant provided the instant land as collateral and believed to receive a loan of 40 million won.

D Subject to the proposed additional loan plan, the power of attorney, certificate of seal impression, etc. required for the procedures for the establishment of a security for the loan from D has been known individually.

In obtaining a loan from F, the land of this case owned by D was registered for the purpose of securing ownership by using the above documents.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving D as above, had D provide its own real property as collateral, thereby obtaining KRW 69,500,000 from F to one bank account (Account Number:G) and the Nonghyup Bank account (Account Number H): 500,000 won in cash and obtained KRW 500,000,000,0000,000,000 won, out of the total amount of 70,000,000 won borrowed as above, and acquired pecuniary profits equivalent to the same amount by personal use.

2. The summary of the grounds for appeal consistently states that the Defendant’s additional loan is not up to 30 million won, and that the F is only about 10 million won, among 70 million won, and there is no reason to lend the land of this case without taking the land as security. In addition, the above 10 million won is close to the time when the money was remitted to the Defendant by the Defendant.

Ultimately, the Defendant is the instant case.