The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-finding is that the Defendant, when entering into a supply contract with the Victim F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim F Co., Ltd.”) and the Defendant did not deceiving the Victim Co., Ltd., and had intent and ability to supply the life quantity as agreed upon under the contract at the time of receiving advance payment from the Victim Co., Ltd., and thus, the Defendant cannot be found to have committed the crime of defraudation by the Defendant.

The judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one year and two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination as to the assertion of mistake of facts

A. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant, who was operating “D”, which is a living place distribution company (animals) and around November 25, 2014, was supplied to the victim company through the victim company G managing director at the notarial office located in Dong-Eup, Chungcheongnam-si, Seoul. Around November 25, 2014, the Defendant would supply KRW 4,000 km per day, excluding Saturdays and Sundays to the FF company, and advance payment KRW 200 million per day to 350 kg per day.

“The commitment was committed.”

However, during the process of running the rehabilitation distribution business, the Defendant had been unable to properly supply the birth place even after receiving advance payment of KRW 400 million from H and KRW 300 million from H. In addition, the Defendant was liable for personal liability of KRW 230 million, while there was no particular property. Therefore, even if the Defendant received advance payment from the victim company, there was no ability or intent to supply the birth place properly in accordance with the above agreement.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, as seen above, by deceiving the victim company through the above G, received from the victim company the total sum of KRW 100 million from the Defendant’s wife J J bank account on November 26, 2014 and KRW 200 million from December 23, 2014 to the above account.

B. The lower court’s judgment is as follows.