A. The victim of mistake of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles shall hear sufficient explanations from the Defendant about the risk of investment and expected profits, and shall pay money to the Defendant with knowledge that they will be used as investment funds.

The Defendant invested all of the money that the Defendant received from the victim to D, but is merely a failure to pay the money due to the fraud from D.

Therefore, there was no intention to commit the crime of defraudation against the defendant, not by deceiving the victim.

B. The lower court’s sentence is too unreasonable and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the adopted evidence, the lower court recognized the fact that the Defendant received KRW 10 million from the victim on October 24, 2014 and KRW 80 million from the police officer on April 2015 under the name of the borrowed money, and KRW 200 million on November 20, 2015, respectively, as investments. (1) The Defendant did not speak the victim of the circumstance that the Defendant intended to make an investment in D at the time when he received each of the borrowed money from the victim, and (2) the Defendant cannot easily understand the Defendant’s change in the lawsuit that all of the funds received from the victim were invested in D, due to the lack of expert knowledge about D’s business operation, and the Defendant could not be seen as having been able to confirm the possibility and feasibility of the above business due to the lack of technical knowledge about D’s business operation, and (3) if the victim did not know about the possibility and feasibility of its investment plan under the pretext of success or omission of D’s business operation or profitability within 00 billion.