A. In fact-finding the defendant could have been able to conclude a secondary supply contract from the F Center at the time of concluding a contract for the supply of goods with the victim, and there was a plan to pay approximately KRW 1.67 million to the victim for the price of goods at KRW 1.67 million, so the defendant did not have any intention to commit fraud.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year and two years of imprisonment, one year and two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the testimony of H of the party witness H, the following circumstances can be acknowledged.

① The victim, who entered into a contract for the supply of goods with a defendant who lacks financial resources, was planned to supply the output amount, etc. that the defendant received from the victim to the F Center under the Daegu Viewing Service, the government office, which is the government office. The government office's payment of the price for the goods is certain, and thus it is anticipated that the defendant would be able to receive the price for the goods from the defendant. ② On February 21, 2017, the defendant used approximately KRW 246 million as the price for the goods from the F Center, and used the amount of KRW 70 million until February 28, 2017. Further, the victim used the amount of KRW 60 million as expenses for June 28, 201. Since it was difficult for the victim to pay the price for the goods to the F Center from the end of March 2017 and until the end of April 2017, it is anticipated that it would be difficult for the victim to use the price for the goods as above KRW 1.5 billion as the price for the goods.