A. In fact, misunderstanding of the legal principles and misunderstanding of the fact, the Defendant received money from the injured party for the purpose of investment in sports soil business, and prepared for the business, but failed to pay the principal and the profits that the injured party promised to pay to the injured party, and did not have any intent to commit fraud

In addition, the victim is an illegal cause benefit by investing money in the defendant knowing that the defendant intends to operate illegal business.

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

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances recognized by the lower court based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, namely, the Defendant’s actual implementation of the business that the Defendant notified the victim for the purpose

In full view of the fact that no objective material exists to determine a person, and that most of the Defendant’s money remitted by the victimized person was disbursed as living expenses, personal debt repayment, entertainment expenses, etc., the lower court’s rejection of the Defendant’s assertion and the lower court’s conviction of the instant facts charged is just and acceptable. In so doing, it did not err by misapprehending the facts alleged by the Defendant, thereby adversely affecting

subsection (b) of this section.

B. As to the assertion of misunderstanding legal principles, even if the person who provided benefits falls under an illegal cause under Article 746 of the Civil Act and is unable to exercise the right to claim a return to the beneficiary, if the beneficiary provided property equivalent to the benefits that are illegal (see Supreme Court Decision 95Do707, Sept. 15, 1995, etc.) through deception, the crime of fraud is established if the victim provided property equivalent to the benefits that are illegal (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 95Do707, Sept. 15, 1995). Thus, even if it is recognized that the victim was invested for the purpose of illegal business as alleged in