A. Error of facts and misapprehension of legal principles did not deceiving the victim, and there was no intention to commit the crime at the time of deception.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. In full view of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant deceivings the victim, such as the facts charged, and defrauds the money.

The victim, from the investigative agency to the investigation before the judgment of the appellate court prior to remand, stated that “The victim has invested KRW 300 million in trust and trusting the horses of the Defendant, and invested in the land contract amount. However, by the end of February 2014, the amount of the investment was not fully repaid up to the present date. Moreover, on March 10, 2014, the victim lent the passbook deposited in KRW 30 million to other investors, stating that he/she would return the passbook deposited in KRW 30 million, and that he/she would not have been fully refunded. The Defendant did not have any intent and ability to complete payment from the beginning.” The victim made a consistent statement in detail as to the details and content of the investment made by the victim at the time of having not been able to do so, the agreement on the return of the investment amount, and the circumstances in which he/she additionally lent the money.

The contents of such statements can be recognized as reliable, consistent with the joint project agreement, written confirmation, entry and exit details, each agreement, the text message sent and received by the defendant and the victim, and the contents of the text.

The Defendant had already received loans from various financial institutions before and after the time of remittance from the victim and had been liable for considerable debts (Evidence Records 94 to 96), and there was no income reported by D Co., Ltd. operated by the Defendant around that time.

(Evidence Records 124 pages). A verbal or written statement to the effect that money will be repaid to the victim several times even after the victim received money from the victim.