A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the above punishment shall be imposed for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

A. The Defendant was not aware of the intent by deception at the time of the instant case, and was also capable of repaying the borrowed money.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Although the probative value of evidence as to the assertion of mistake of facts is left to the discretion of a judge, such judgment shall be in accordance with the logical and empirical rules, and in the case of a criminal trial, criminal facts may be admitted when it reaches the proof to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt, this does not require that all possible doubts be excluded.

The intent of the crime of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of fraud, shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the objective circumstances, such as the defendant's financial history, environment, details of the crime, and the process of performing transactions before and after the crime, unless the defendant is led to confession. The criminal intent is sufficient not to be a conclusive intention but to do so. In the civil monetary lending relationship, the criminal intent of the defraudation of the borrowed money can not be immediately recognized with the non-performance of the obligation in the civil monetary lending relationship. However, if the defendant borrowed the money by pretending that the defendant would have no intention to make a certain change or would have no ability to repay within the due date,

On the other hand, in calculating active property in order to judge the re-performance of the defendant, the property which has no property value should be excluded, except in extenuating circumstances. If the property is a claim, it would be the principal criteria to determine whether the property is substantially valuable in property.

According to each borrowed document submitted by the Defendant as reference material from the trial to September 24, 2015, the Defendant had a considerable amount of loans to G or H at the time of the instant case.

I am, however, do not.