The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The defendant of mistake of facts did not set off against the defendant's claim against F with the service payment claim against F. The defendant did not provide complete service due to the victim's unfaithful conduct of work. Thus, the defendant was not paid the remaining service payment from the above company. Thus, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty against the defendant is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

B. The sentence (one million won of fine) imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The court below made a statement to the effect that "H, based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, operated F Co., Ltd. F (hereinafter "F"), "F lent money to the defendant, and the defendant was unable to repay the above loan obligation with the profits accrued from the execution of the service of this case." The defendant ordered the service of this case to contract the service of this case to the defendant, and all or part of the remainder of the service cost of 27 million won, excluding the amount of 15 million won paid as advance, was naturally set off against F's claim against the defendant." According to the above H's statement, the defendant could have been assumed that the defendant performed the service of this case by F at the time of receiving the service of this case from F or as part of the profits accrued from the execution of the service of this case, or set off both the debt of F at the time of performing the service of this case against the defendant's obligation of F as well as the debt of F, as the above amount already received from the victim and the victim.