가. 사실오인 피고인은 고소인들과 함께 부동산사업에 투자할 목적으로 고소인들의 인척 소유인원주시 H 소재 토지 약 7,300평을 매입하기로 한 후, 피고인의 스페인은행 계좌에 유치되어 있는 아프리카 베넹공화국 UBA은행 발행 펀드기금을 사용하기 위해 고소인들과 협의하여 고소인들이 지급한 금원을 나이지리아 제니스은행 등에 투자, 송금하게 된 것일 뿐이고 고소인들을 기망하여 금원을 편취한 것이 아님에도, 원심은 그와 달리 피고인이 편취의 고의를 가지고 원심 판시 범죄사실 기재와 같은 경위로 고소인들을 기망하여 금원을 편취하였다고 단정하였으니, 원심판결에는 사실을 오인하여 판결에 영향을 미친 위법이 있다.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable;

2. Determination

A. In full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the defendant did not hold a deposit in the bank account located in Sweden or deposit an amount equivalent to 100 to 20 billion won in a foreign bank, including Sweden and Sweden, and even if borrowed money from the victims, he did not have an intention or ability to repay the money. Nevertheless, the defendant can be acknowledged that he received and fraudulently acquired the money from the victims on several occasions in sum as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the court below, on several occasions as stated in the judgment of the court below, from the victims on several occasions as a sum of KRW 210 million in borrowed money. Thus, the above argument by the defendant is without merit.

Although the defendant asserts to the effect that he was accused of the foreigner, such as his lease mera and meracota, and that he did not intend to deceive the victims, the defendant does not have any intention to deceive the victims only once but only by international telephone or e-mail.