A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eleven months.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, each of the victims C.

A. As to each fraud part of the judgment of the court below rendered on January 17, 2010 and March 16, 2010 against the victim C, Defendant (in fact-finding and unreasonable sentencing) (a) had the intent and ability to repay to the Defendant since the Defendant paid the full amount of KRW 40 million in cash by settling the victim C’s card.

B) As to the fraud part against the victim H, the Defendant received KRW 50 million from the victim H as investment money, and used KRW 40 million with the exception of KRW 10 million returned to the victim H as well as the purchase price for high-level fish. C) With respect to the fraud part against the victim L, the Defendant manufactured ice removal machine as requested by the victim L, stored ice in the Russia, but did not use ice removal machine due to the increase in water temperature, but did not specify the type of ice removal with the victim N at the time of the contract, but the Defendant sent the victim N’s sample production to the victim N, and the Defendant, who is difficult to import ice production, did not receive the project by refusing to do so. For the same reason, the Defendant is not established for the same reason. Even if the above assertion of unreasonable sentencing is without merit, the lower court’s allegation that there was an unreasonable error in the judgment of the lower court for a period of two years without any reason (2.2.).

B. On January 7, 2010 of the judgment of the court below, as to the part on the fraud of the victim C claiming a misunderstanding of facts regarding the acquittal portion among the judgment of the court below, this part of the judgment of the court below may also be found guilty considering the following: (a) the Defendant prepared a loan certificate of KRW 60 million to the victim C; and (b) the Defendant stated that the Defendant was invested KRW 60 million from the victim C in the case of fraud against R for which the judgment of conviction became final and conclusive; and (c) the Defendant stated that he was invested in the victim