A. In the event that the defendant does not disclose that he did not have a debt to the victim, the defendant merely intended to return 6.1 million won, and there was no fact that he intended to repay money without any condition as stated in the facts charged in the instant case.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fine 1.5 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant made the aforementioned assertion in the lower court as to the assertion of mistake of facts, and the lower court, on this occasion, determined that the Defendant’s deception could be sufficiently ratified as if he were to pay the said amount, not to have promised to pay KRW 6.1 million to F, the victim’s wife, on the condition that the Defendant did not disclose that he did not have any obligation to the victim, and that the Defendant did not accept the Defendant’s assertion.

A thorough examination of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below in light of the records, the above determination by the court below is just and there is no error of law in misconception of facts alleged by the defendant.

Therefore, we cannot accept this part of the defendant's assertion.

B. The Defendant has a record of criminal punishment on several occasions, including imprisonment, for the same crime.

Until now, victims have not been recovered from damage.

In addition, considering the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, the details and contents of the instant crime, and the sentencing conditions indicated in the instant records and pleadings, the lower court’s sentence cannot be deemed unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is not accepted.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.