The lower court: (a) acquired 200 million won as business expenses by deceiving the victim, by making it possible for the Defendant to purchase a long-term rental apartment owned by SP Corporation by special means of sale; and (b) by deceiving the victim as business expenses.

The judgment of the first instance court which found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged was affirmed as it is.

As to this, the Defendant did not make a false statement to the victim, and used the business expenses invested by the victimized person in accordance with the agreement, but the lower court, on the ground that the Defendant made a false statement to the injured person.

In other words, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the fact that such act constitutes deception.

The argument is asserted.

However, even if examining the relevant legal principles and evidence, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the facts contrary to logical and empirical rules or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on deception in fraud, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.