A. In order to construct a new building, the Defendant borrowed KRW 70 million from the injured party and received fire insurance money from the injured party on behalf of the injured party. The construction business operator unilaterally discontinued the construction work despite the Defendant’s payment of the construction cost and eventually failed to settle the construction cost according to the agreement with the injured party. The Defendant did not have any intent and ability to repay the construction cost of KRW 70 million at the time of borrowing the above KRW 70 million, or received the victim’s fire insurance money in lieu of the injured party’s intent to obtain unlawful acquisition.

shall not be deemed to exist.

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

2. Determination

A. 1) As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the defendant and his defense counsel asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal in this part, and the court below rejected the above assertion in detail. In light of the records of this case, the court below's decision is just and acceptable, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

It does not appear.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion that there was no intention to commit fraud is without merit.

2) As to the assertion on the crime of cross-age, the intention of unlawful acquisition in the crime of embezzlement is deemed to be the intention of unlawful acquisition.

of the property of another person in violation of his or her duty for the purpose of seeking the benefit of himself or a third party, and, after the fact, there was an intention to return, reimburse, or preserve the property of another person.

Even if there is no obstacle to recognizing the intention of illegal acquisition (see Supreme Court Decision 201Do7259, Mar. 14, 2013). B), the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, i.e., ①., the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court.