A. The court below accepted the facts charged in this case and convicted the defendant, despite the fact that the defendant had no deceptiond the victim at the time of borrowing money from the victim, and although he had the intent and ability to repay the above money, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the grounds of unfair sentencing (the fine of KRW 1,500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In the judgment of the court below on the assertion of mistake of facts, the defendant argued the same facts as the reasons for appeal in this case, and the court below rejected the above argument in detail under the title "the judgment on the defendant and his defense counsel" in the reasons for the judgment, and a thorough comparison with the records of the judgment of the court below, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error of law of misunderstanding of facts as pointed out by the defendant, and therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake

B. In light of the following: (a) the Defendant’s money obtained by deception from the victim is not so big; (b) the Defendant partially repaid the money; (c) the Defendant was punished for the same kind of crime; and (d) the Defendant did not reach an agreement with the victim; and (e) other circumstances that are conditions for sentencing as indicated in the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, character, character, environment, family relationship, and circumstances after the crime, the Defendant’s punishment imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable; and therefore,

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.