The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant, not by deceiving the victim and by deceiving the victim, was to obtain additional loans from other financial institutions and to repay the borrowed money at the time of the instant loan, and was able to repay the borrowed money at the time of the instant loan.

The Defendant, on March 27, 2012, tried to repay the instant loan to the money created with a secured loan granted on a loan on the same day, but did not repay the loan by being assaulted by the victim on the same day.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is well aware that the Defendant had been paying KRW 80-90 million each month interest on the collateral security debt of KRW 230 million with respect to an apartment under the name of the wife C, and there was no certain income, and even if he borrowed money from the victim D because it is difficult to obtain additional loans from the said apartment, the Defendant did not have any intention or ability to repay the money within one month.

Nevertheless, on December 14, 2011, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant would have repaid the amount of KRW 10 million,00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, was immediately transferred or delivered 9.1 million won by her female.

B. In full view of the admitted evidence, the lower court determined that the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay money within one month even if the Defendant borrowed money from the victim D at the time of the instant loan, and, at the time of the Defendant’s wife, J apartment 105 Dong 201 et al.