The part of the defendant's case shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

The order for compensation of the original judgment.

A. Regarding the case of 2020 high-class 947, there was no deception against the victim L, and there was no intention to obtain fraud.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (three years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant asserts that, at the time of the determination of the misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the Defendant and the victim were in a relationship with the Defendant, but the victim was aware that the management of the Defendant was difficult, and only lent money to the Defendant to help the Defendant, and that the Defendant did not deceiving the victim as stated in the judgment of the lower court.

However, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, i.e., ① the defendant consistently stated that the defendant would have invested in China’s financial resources, i.e., (i) the re-investment is expected from China; (ii) the defendant borrowed money from China; (iii) the defendant borrowed money from the victim each time he borrowed money; (iv) the defendant borrowed money from the victim by the due date for the first month or the second month; and (v) the defendant did not have specific contents such as the size and time of the investment from China; (v) the defendant was unable to receive an investment from China; and (v) the defendant’s investment funds should be used at the source prescribed by the investment contract, even if the defendant received an investment from China; and (v) the defendant could have arbitrarily borrowed money from the victim; and (v) the defendant did not have made profits at the time of the payment of money to the victim.