A. In fact, the Defendant was scheduled to obtain a business loan from F, and the intent or ability to repay is sufficient, such as that he/she has a transaction payment claim, and he/she borrowed KRW 10,00 from the victim D. Therefore, there was no intention to commit fraud.

The judgment of the court below that recognized the crime of fraud as it is is erroneous.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (2 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) The judgment of the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts (1) is to be paid within one week, if the victim, in the investigative agency and the court of the court of the court below, has borrowed 20 million won of the business fund to be used urgently since he/she was aware of the withdrawal of the company fund to be used by the defendant as an employee in the investigative agency and the court of the court below.

On the other hand, I would like to bring forward KRW 10 million, which is allowed by the circumstances, and only 2 million won was paid only after one year thereafter, and the defendant was not contacted with the defendant. In particular, the victim was present at the court below after receiving the full repayment of the loan from the defendant, and then made a statement in the same manner as the defendant appeared at the court below. There is no motive to make a false statement to the disadvantage of the defendant after the agreement. Accordingly, it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant would immediately be able to make a repayment as stated by the victim's statement, and that the defendant borrowed KRW 10 million from the damaged person. ③ The defendant presented a certificate of commitment to pay the cosmetics, which was written by F as evidence of the transaction claim against F at the time of the loan, but it was three months or more, and around that time, it is possible to recover the loan itself only under the actual circumstances where the payment was made in the F9 times.