The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

except that, for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, based on the erroneous determination of facts, did not need to borrow money since he received only any balance arising from a sales contract as a seller of studio in the instant case. The Defendant, who directly talks with the victim about the terms and conditions of the lease, is the buyer

Therefore, the defendant did not deceiving the victim.

In addition to the establishment of the right to collateral security of KRW 750,00,000 for the studio of the instant case by the Defendant, there was a intent to repay the amount of KRW 500,000 in face value under B

In addition to the studio of this case, the Defendant owned real estate equivalent to 3.5 billion won at the market price in the name of B, and the victim received dividends of 7.5 million won at the auction procedure for the studio of this case and was able to collect the total amount of the loan. The Defendant had the ability to repay.

Therefore, the defendant did not have the intention of fraud.

Since it is confirmed that 40 million won out of 477,230,000 won acquired through deceit as stated in the judgment of the court below is used by the victim, 40 million won should be deducted from the acquired amount.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year and nine months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the allegation of deception 1 and fraud, the court below as to the allegation of deception 1 and fraud, it explained the victim as well as the persons who introduced monetary transactions with the defendant and the defendant about the debt borne by the original building of this case, such as lease deposit and provisional seizure debt, and the terms and conditions of loan. The name of the debtor in the above monetary transaction is the defendant's wife and later a promissory note deed was made in the name of the defendant's wife, and part of the amount remitted to the defendant's account in addition to the amount subrogated to the tenant, the National Tax Service, and the Gwanak-gu Office among the above loans, is not the return of