The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. When the victim borrows money from the victim, the Defendant notified the victim of the purpose and method of repayment of the borrowed money as the truth, and thereafter, the Defendant did not lend money to the micro enterprise contrary to the intent of the Defendant.

Therefore, there is no intention of deception and deception to the defendant.

(b) The sentence of unfair sentencing (the court below's imprisonment with prison labor for six months).

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, fraud is established by deceiving another person, making a mistake, inducing a dispositive act, thereby obtaining property or pecuniary benefits. On the other hand, there should be causation between deception, mistake, and property disposal act. On the other hand, the existence of a causal relationship between such deception and property disposal act should be determined generally and objectively by taking into account the situation of transaction, the other party’s knowledge, character, experience, occupation, etc. In addition, unless the defendant does not make a confession, the crime of deception, which is a constituent element of fraud, should be determined by taking into account such objective circumstances as the defendant’s financial power before and after the crime, environment, details of the crime, process of transaction, etc. In addition, if the other party did not respond to the preparation of funds to borrow money from another person, and if the other party did not respond to the original notice about the purpose of use or method of raising funds to repay the borrowed money, the crime of fraud is established. In addition, the defendant alleged in this part of the judgment below, but the court below rejected the grounds for appeal in detail.

In full view of various circumstances revealed by the lower court’s duly admitted and investigated evidence, the lower court’s aforementioned determination.