The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The existence of the crime of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of fraud, shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the objective circumstances such as the defendant's financial history, environment, contents of the crime, the process of transaction, and the relationship with the victim, unless the defendant makes a confession (see Supreme Court Decision 95Do3034, Mar. 26, 1996). The recognition of the crime should be proved to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt (Article 307 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act). However, the selection of evidence and the probative value of evidence conducted on the premise of the recognition of the fact belongs to the free judgment of the fact-finding court (Article 308 of the Criminal Procedure Act). The court below rejected the grounds for appeal as to the mistake of fact on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

The allegation in the grounds of appeal is the purport of disputing the determination of the lower court’s fact-finding, and is merely an error in the determination of the lower court’s choice of evidence and probative value, which belong to the free judgment of the fact-finding court. In addition, even when examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the aforementioned legal doctrine and the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine on deception and deception of fraud, or by exceeding the bounds of free evaluation of evidence by violating logical

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