A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

except that the ruling shall be made for one year from the date of the final judgment.

A. In spite of the intention and ability of the defendant to repay money from the victims, the court below convicted the defendant. The judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. Even if the conviction of an unreasonable sentencing decision is recognized, the sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, are: ① there was no particular property at the time when the defendant borrowed money from the victims; ② there was a debt exceeding KRW 5 million per month with the principal and interest on the borrowed money; ② there was fraud against the victim; ② the defendant was a member of the time when he borrowed KRW 20 million from the above victim; and the victim was a system by which he was entitled to receive the extended money on December 15, 201. In addition, the victims did not have the ability to pay the extended money and the defendant could not receive the extended money in fact because the victim did not pay the borrowed money at the time; ③ the defendant could not receive the extended money regardless of the victim’s intent to borrow money and the defendant’s ability to use the borrowed money, regardless of the fact that the defendant borrowed money from the victim’s intent to borrow money.

B. Although it does not seem obvious that the defendant had opened the place of unfair sentencing, the defendant was the primary offender, and the defendant was operating the restaurant while operating the restaurant.