A. Defendant (1) misunderstanding of facts (the fraud of the victim K on July 17, 2008) had a loan claim of KRW 150 million against the victim K as of July 17, 2008, and thus, even if the above victim was issued KRW 10 million from the above victim, the defendant did not have the intent of defraudation, and the above victim did not have any property damage.

(2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor (misunderstanding of facts as to the acquittal portion), the fact that (1) the Defendant, even if the Defendant received the guidance from the victim H or K from July 201 to April 2008, did not have the intent and ability to normally make a successful bid payment, by deceiving the victims, thereby deceiving the victims, and (2) even though the Defendant did not lend KRW 150 million to K and M, it can be sufficiently recognized that the Defendant submitted a false complaint with the content that the Defendant filed a criminal complaint against K and M on May 22, 2013, and submitted it to K and M to fully recognize the fact that the Defendant did not have any intention and ability to make a successful bid payment.

2. Determination

A. According to the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts (the fraud of the victim K on July 17, 2008), although the defendant had no intent and ability to pay the successful bid amount normally even if he/she has received the money from the fraternity members, it can be sufficiently recognized that he/she has acquired the above victim's money from the above victim's remittance of KRW 150 million on July 17, 2008 and acquired it through the above victim's money. The defendant had a claim for loans of KRW 150 million on July 17, 2008 with the intent to offset the above victim's debt.