A. The judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case even though the Defendant received a donation of KRW 229,516,200 from the victim D, and did not borrow it, and even if the Defendant did not deception the victim as stated in the facts charged, it erred by misapprehending the legal principles or misapprehending the legal principles.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant also asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal, even in the lower court’s determination on the mistake of facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine.

1) In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court determined that the Defendant, as stated in the facts charged, deceiving the victim and borrowed KRW 229,516,200 from the victim.

Recognizing the facts charged of this case and finding the guilty guilty.

A) The court below's nature of the money received by the defendant: ① stated that the victim lent money to the defendant; ② the defendant also requested an investigative agency to lend money to the victim; and ② from around 2009, he borrowed money from the victim; and also recognized that he borrowed money from the victim; and always paid to the victim.

frecing frecing

that the money received from the injured was the borrowed money.

(3) The witness G, which is favorable to the defendant, stated in the court of the court below that the economic situation of the victim is not sufficient to give 230 million won to the victim, and the defendant India investigative agency is aware that the financial condition of the victim is difficult.

In full view of the fact that the defendant made a statement (No. 2, 155 pages of evidence records), it was recognized that the money received from the injured party was not donated but borrowed.

B) The lower court determined as follows: ① The victim is from the investigative agency to the court below’s trial.