A. In the meantime, the letter of confirmation on July 2, 2014 (the 283 pages of the investigation record) is not prepared by the defendant, but forged or forged (the part or signed by the defendant does not have any part or signed by the defendant, a seal for strawing stated "BK" other than the defendant's name is affixed, and neither an identification card nor a certificate of seal impression, etc. are attached) nor is it reliable as it was written by the victim's coercion.

2) The certificate of borrowing from the person on October 25, 2013 (the page 41 pages of investigation records), and the certificate of borrowing from the person on November 6, 2013 (the page 42 of investigation records) is not prepared by the defendant (not stating the part written by the defendant in his/her own pen).

B. Fact-misunderstanding 1) Of the total amount of the facts charged in this case, the Defendant did not receive KRW 50 million from the victim around August 21, 2013, and the Defendant received KRW 50 million from the victim as of August 30, 2013 to the account transfer from the victim on or around March 8, 2013, it is merely a return that the Defendant lent to the victim on or around March 8, 2013, and ③ KRW 50 million from among the money received from September 24, 2013 to December 6, 2013, the Defendant received KRW 50 million from the victim on or around September 4, 2013, and thus, the Defendant received KRW 210 million from the victim on or around September 4, 2013 under the name of the Defendant’s borrowing money and KRW 60 million from the remainder of the money.

3) The Defendant borrowed money from the victim under the name of the Defendant’s business funds, etc., not deceiving the Defendant into the name of the pharmaceutical company’s investment.

4) At the time of borrowing money from the victim, the Defendant had the intent to repay and pay the money.

(c)

The punishment sentenced by the court below (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of violation of the rules of evidence, the court’s determination on the establishment of the authenticity of the relevant legal principles is based on all the evidentiary materials and arguments.