A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles have been actually carried out after the contract, and the reason why the construction of this case was not properly carried out is due to the nonperformance of the J, a partner who committed an undertaking to seek construction funds. Therefore, the defendant did not have the intention to obtain fraud.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case. In so doing, it erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Judgment on mistake and misunderstanding of legal principles

A. On November 24, 2016, the lower court also asserted the same purport as the allegation in the grounds for appeal, and accordingly, the lower court concluded a contract for construction work with the victim on November 24, 2016 with respect to the E new building construction project for which the victim placed an order (hereinafter “instant construction project”). At the time, the Defendant thought that the construction work should be subcontracted to M., and anticipated the Defendant’s profits from the instant construction project to be KRW 30 million. As to the remodeling project in Gwangju Hospital, the Defendant was liable to compensate N for the damages amounting to KRW 30 million, and ② the Defendant was paid KRW 35 million from the victim on November 25, 2016, and was using KRW 15 million for another construction site, and was unable to receive KRW 5 million from the victim on December 15, 2016 to receive KRW 30 million from the victim on the date of the instant construction project, and the Defendant was paying the construction work price for the said more than KRW 30 million from the victim on the date of the instant construction project.