The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant explained the circumstances to the victim H who was known to the general public due to the economic situation of the family and borrowed money. In the process of late repayment, it is unfair for the lower court to take into account the circumstances since the Defendant did not receive money from the victim because it does not receive money from the victim, and the victim does not want the Defendant’s punishment. In so doing, the lower court’s punishment (one year of imprisonment) is excessively unreasonable.

2. First of all, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant could admit the victim as a FF sports speciality student at around the beginning of 2009. In response, the defendant demanded that the victim be admitted to I University in consideration of the fact that there was no special relation with the J, which is the supervisor of I University at the time, and that the defendant would be allowed to request the above money. The defendant demanded money at the time. On June 2009, the defendant received the victim directly or by cash and check, and requested the J to enter the victim several times, but refused the victim's admission, and the victim requested the return of the money to I University in consideration of the fact that the defendant had already been refused to use the money, the defendant could not receive money from the victim's family-specific student's admission, and the defendant could not receive money from the victim's family-specific student's admission to the National University since he could not receive money from the victim's family-specific student's admission to the National University (the defendant's admission to the National University).