A. Money borrowed from the injured party by mistake of fact is not a total of KRW 30 million as indicated in the instant facts charged, but a total of KRW 5 million on April 8, 2008, KRW 18 million on Nov. 12, 2008, and KRW 3 million on Nov. 17, 2008, as indicated in the instant facts charged.

In addition, there was no intention of the defendant to acquire money from the damaged person.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (an amount of KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant made a confession of the instant facts charged at an investigative agency, and the lower court also argued only the amount of fraud at the first instance court’s third trial date, thereby making a confession. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the fact that the Defendant acquired a total of KRW 30 million from the injured party, and there is no other circumstance to suspect the credibility of the Defendant’s confession statement.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is just and acceptable, and there is no violation of law by mistake of facts as alleged by the defendant.

1) First, we examine the amount of money borrowed by the Defendant from the injured party.

The victim consistently lent a total of KRW 30 million to the defendant to the investigative agency.

The statement was made, and the statement of account transaction submitted by the victim is consistent with the victim's statement even if it is consistent with the victim's statement.

The victim agreed to the original agreement with the defendant and also submitted a written application to the effect that he received some money before filing a complaint from the defendant. The victim made a false statement.

There are no circumstances to see.

The defendant also borrowed 30 million won from the injured party in the investigative agency.