A. In relation to Defendant 1’s mistake of facts) fraud against the victim B, the Defendant did not have committed deception by borrowing money from the victim B in order to have the victim go against himself/herself, and it cannot be readily concluded that the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay in light of the size of the loan or the Defendant’s income at the time of borrowing.

B) In relation to the fraud against the victim G, the Defendant was notified of the fact that he could obtain CFP loans since November 3, 2017 when the individual rehabilitation case was terminated, and around August 2016, the Defendant informed all of the above circumstances at the time when he borrowed KRW 14.7 million from the victim G and determined the due date on February 2018, when the CFP loans could be possible. However, the individual rehabilitation procedure was abolished due to the aggravation of the disease around March 2017, and the CFP loans could not be performed, and the said loans could not be repaid due to the aggravation of the disease. (CFP loans could not be repaid) Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the fraud against the victim B among the facts charged in the instant case and of the fraud against the victim G, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of mistake of facts, the sentence of a fine of KRW 6 million imposed by the lower court on the ground of unfair sentencing is too unreasonable and unfair. (b) The fact that the Defendant received a time limit deposit from the beginning even though he did not have the intent or ability to normally pay the credit deposit, and that the Defendant received the said time limit deposit from the beginning, thereby inducing the victim B to pay the credit deposit, and by deceiving the victim B, acquired the said money by transfer.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the victim B of fraud on July 22, 2016 among the facts charged in the instant case is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The punishment of a fine of 6 million won imposed by the court below on the grounds that the punishment is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

(a) mistake of facts by the defendant;