The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The defendant's argument in the grounds of appeal is that the injured couple already knew of the defendant's debt status and the rehabilitation application plan, but it was judged that the sales records of the hospital operated by the defendant's husband and wife could obtain high profit in a short period, and that the defendant could obtain a short period of time. Thus, the defendant deceiving the victim at the time of borrowing.

Despite the fact that it cannot be said that there was a criminal intent to obtain fraud or to commit fraud, the court below found the defendant guilty by conducting a reliable fact-finding of the victim's false statement. The purport of the judgment of the court below is that the judgment of the court below is illegal.

However, inasmuch as the recognition of facts and the selection and evaluation of evidence, which are the premise thereof, do not exceed the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, it cannot be found that the lower court exceeded the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence even in light of the reasoning of the lower judgment and the record.

Therefore, the above argument in the grounds of appeal is merely to criticize matters falling under the exclusive right of the court of original judgment, and it cannot be accepted as a legitimate ground of appeal.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.