The judgment of the court below (excluding the part concerning an application for compensation) shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

except that this shall not apply.

1. The court below rejected the application for compensation by the applicant for compensation, and since the applicant for compensation cannot file an objection against the judgment dismissing the application for compensation order pursuant to Article 32(4) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, the above order for compensation becomes final and conclusive immediately, the part of the court below's rejection of the application for compensation order shall be excluded from the scope of the

Therefore, the scope of this court's adjudication is limited to the defendant case.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles have borrowed KRW 300 million from the victim company B (hereinafter “victim company”), and the defendant presented to I, a inside director of the above company, various data, such as a copy of passbook and a statement of financial intent, etc. concerning the acceptance of the J building (hereinafter “instant building”), and explained the process of taking over without any increase or decrease. The victim company confirmed various data as above and provided explanations on the process of taking over the above information to the defendant at I’s own decision, thereby lending KRW 300 million to the defendant. Thus, the defendant did not defraud the victim company by deceiving the victim company.

In addition, the Defendant believed that it would be able to raise funds from O (hereinafter “O”), and there was no way to verify whether the amount of KRW 200-300-300,000 as indicated in the copy of the passbook issued by O was actually in existence in the passbook. The Defendant’s return of the copy of the passbook to O to L is the following: (a) the Defendant borrowed money from the victim company and borrowed money from L; (b) even if there was a request from L to recover the copy of the passbook from the victim company at the time of borrowing money from the victim company, it does not mean that such request for recovery is difficult; (c) therefore, the Defendant did not deceive the victim company, knowing that it was impossible for O to raise funds.