A. The judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty even though the defendant was not guilty of the crime of deception because he was paid prepaid money from the victim with the intention of working normally at the victim's multiples at the time of the instant case, there is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts

B. The judgment of the court below on the grounds that the sentence imposed on the defendant (the fine of KRW 2,00,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Whether fraud is established as to the assertion of mistake of facts ought to be determined at the time of such act (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Do5618, Sept. 25, 2008). As long as the defendant does not make a confession, the criminal intent of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of a crime, should be determined by comprehensively taking into account objective circumstances such as the defendant’s financial power before and after the crime, the environment, the details and details of the crime, and the process of transaction execution

(2) In light of the above legal principles, the Defendant could sufficiently recognize the fact that the Defendant acquired 4,300,000 won in advance, as stated in the facts constituting a crime in the judgment below, in full view of: (a) the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below; (b) the Defendant did not work one day after receiving advance payment from the victim for a day; and (c) the Defendant did not work at the meeting of the Defendant; and (d) the Defendant did not return the amount of damage to the victim after the instant case; and (c) the Defendant did not return the amount of damage to the victim after the instant case; and thus, the Defendant’s aforementioned assertion is without merit.

B. As to the assertion on unfair sentencing, the Defendant did not intend to work as the primary offender or employee, and the crime of this case, which acquired the prepaid money by means of false words, is not good, and the Defendant did not agree with the victim up to the trial, and the Defendant wants to punish the Defendant and other crimes of this case.