A. Although the Defendant attempted to create a new collateral on the land of the JJ (hereinafter “J”) of the Chungcheongnam-gun, the Defendant, unlike the initial promise, failed to establish a new collateral, because the victim requested the establishment of a new maximum debt amount of KRW 50 million, not the maximum debt amount of KRW 75 million, which is not the maximum debt amount of KRW 50 million, and thus, the Defendant did not have an intent to deceive the victim.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in misconception of facts.

B. The sentence of imprisonment (eight months of imprisonment) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the court below's judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts and the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the defendant can be sufficiently recognized that he/she acquired financial benefits by deceiving the victim as stated in the facts charged in this case. Thus, the above argument of mistake of facts by the defendant is rejected.

1) The Defendant, through the network I, cancelled the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage on the “FF land” (hereinafter “F F F land”), and subsequently, would obtain a loan from the said F land as a collateral, and would repay the loan to the Defendant. If the loan is not made, the Defendant would create a new collateral security to secure a claim on the land owned by the Defendant’s wife E. (2) The victim heard the awareness that the documents necessary for the establishment of a new collateral security on the said J land were submitted to the H certified judicial scrivener’s office, and cancelled the collateral security established on the said F land on September 27, 2013.

3. However, the Defendant did not grant F land loans to the victim or set up a new collateral security on the J land.