A. In light of the defendant's statement or relevant evidence, it is true that the defendant's defense that the payment of the price of JJ vessel and X vessel was made in full is true.

K has not received the payment from the Defendant for the J vessel, but considering the details of the remittance by the Defendant to K, the possibility that K made a false statement in order to avoid the responsibility for the rescission of the contract, it is difficult to view that K’s statement has credibility to the extent that it damages the Defendant’s defense and is found guilty of this part of the facts charged.

Therefore, the verdict of innocence should be pronounced on this part of the facts charged.

(2) At the time when the Defendant borrowed money from the victim as to the criminal facts of the judgment below, the Defendant had the intent and ability to pay the money.

Therefore, the verdict of innocence should also be pronounced to the facts charged.

B. Even if the Defendant’s conviction is acknowledged, the lower court’s imprisonment (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the court below and the court below’s duly adopted and investigated the criminal facts of paragraph (1) of the crime as stated in the judgment of the court below, it can be sufficiently recognized that the Defendant, as stated in this part of the facts charged, deceiving the victim and using the money that the victim received as the purchase price for the JJ vessel as the purchase price for the X vessel, etc.

① K prepared a written confirmation to the effect that “The purchase price of the J vessel was not deposited until November 20, 2010, and thus, the contract was reversed, and the Defendant remitted USD 301,000 to X vessel according to the Defendant’s instruction.” The Defendant made a statement in the phone call with the investigative agency to the same effect.