A. Fact-finding 1) As to the part of the instant facts charged, the Defendant intended to borrow and borrow 2.5 million won among the instant facts charged, but intended to pay 60,000 won to the victim only. 2) As to the part of the instant facts charged, the Defendant borrowed 600,000 won for the purpose of using the drug value, hospital expenses, and medicine as a selective distribution, and used it for the actual hospital expenses, drug value, etc., and on January 2013, the Defendant repaid 850,000 won to the victim.

Therefore, the crime of fraud is not established since the defendant loaned the money to the victim after talking about the purpose of the money.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (2 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts are: (a) the Defendant is a daily worker and the property is a full amount of KRW 35 million; and (b) the Defendant, on September 21, 2012, even if he did not own the house, he/she should get a mortgage to the Defendant on September 21, 2012; (c) if he/she lends money to the Defendant for the purpose of securing mortgage, he/she was paid KRW 2.5 million by selling the house immediately; (d) the Defendant was paid KRW 2.5 million from the victim; and (e) the Defendant was fully used for the Defendant’s daily expenses; (e) the Defendant was required to pay money to the Defendant; and (e) the Defendant was paid KRW 300,000 to the Defendant on the day when he/she received money.” (e.g., documents that the Defendant would have lent money to the Defendant on the same day; and (e) the Defendant was paid KRW 6000,0,00,000 on the day.