A. In fact, the Defendant was able and able to obtain a loan through the “E” established by the J, one’s own jurisdiction, and was paid money from the damaged party as the expense. The Defendant did not receive money from the F Chairperson’s personnel management expenses for G, minc minc c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court on the assertion of factual mistake, the lower court fully recognizes the fact that the Defendant, although having no intent or ability to allow the victim to obtain a loan, was false and necessary for the loan, and acquired money from the damaged party under the name of personnel expenses for G, minccc purchase cost to donate to the wife, minc purchase cost to donate, and the television purchase cost to donate to the audience (the change of the Defendant). The Defendant could have actually damaged the victim through E (the Defendant was able to actually lend money to the victim)

There is no evidence to acknowledge the specific circumstances, and the defendant used the money paid by the injured party for expenses related to the loan.

In light of the fact that there is no evidence to view, according to the Defendant’s police statement, the Defendant received the cost of purchasing television from his wife, not his wife, but his wife’s minccke, audience, etc., and the victim did not have any reason to reduce such cost to the Defendant). The Defendant’s assertion of mistake is without merit.

B. The fact that the defendant denies and does not reflect the crime, re-offending despite the previous conviction of the same kind, the fact that the damage was not recovered, and the age of the defendant;