사기
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the defendant owned real estate equivalent to 50 million won at the market price at the time of borrowing money from the victim, and the installment was paid in three times, and there was an error of misconception of facts that found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged.
2. The court below found the following facts based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below: ① although the defendant owned real estate equivalent to KRW 450 million at the market price at the time when he applied for a loan to the victim, the provisional registration of the right to claim ownership was established in G; ② since the right to claim ownership was established for the above real estate with the maximum debt amount of KRW 4.3 million, the collateral value of the above real estate can be said to be little; ② the victim created a mortgage on the instant vehicle purchased by the defendant with the loan amount of KRW 10,000,000,000 as the credit amount of the above real estate; ② the defendant provided the instant vehicle as collateral for the purpose of lending money in pawnpo, the defendant did not know the location and contact address of pawnpo, even if it appears impossible to collect the vehicle, ③ there was no other sufficient evidence to view that the defendant had the ability to repay the loan amount to pay the loan amount to KRW 36,300,000,000,000.
Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.
3. As the appeal by the defendant is groundless, Article 364 of the Criminal Procedure Act is not reasonable.