A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

A. Defendant 1) Defendant 1 did not have obtained money by deceiving the victim by deceiving the victim, and the amount of fraud by the 1st of the criminal facts stated in the judgment below is also KRW 2.5 million through KRW 2.80 million, not only KRW 3.5 million, but also KRW 2.5 million. 2) The lower court’s punishment of unfair sentencing (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of fraudulent bankruptcy among the facts charged in the instant case by misapprehending the legal doctrine or acquitted.

2. Determination

A. 1) The criminal intent of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of a crime of fraud, of the relevant legal doctrine, should be determined by comprehensively taking into account the objective circumstances such as the Defendant’s financial history, environment, details of the crime, and process of transaction before and after the crime unless the Defendant makes a confession. The criminal intent is sufficient not to be conclusive intention but to do so in the civil monetary lending relationship, and the criminal intent of defraudation of the borrowed money can not be acknowledged immediately with default in the civil monetary lending relationship. However, in the event the Defendant borrowed the money by pretending that it would be possible to repay the money without the intention of full repayment or the due date of repayment, even though the Defendant did not have the ability to repay it at the time of borrowing, the criminal intent of defraudation can be recognized (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 97Do2630, Jan. 20, 198; 83Do340, May 10, 198; 2010Do139, May 13, 2011).

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is not accepted.

① The victim, from the investigative agency to the court of the court below, is the defendant at the time of lending the instant money to the defendant.