The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In the event that the Defendant misunderstanding of fact made K an investment of KRW 25 million, the victim asked K to participate in the investment for the purpose of making himself/herself gain profit, and the Defendant received KRW 3 million from the damaged person as the investment money.

In other words, the defendant does not borrow 3 million won from the injured party with the intention of deceiving the victim.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (2 million won) is too heavy.

2. Determination

A. As to the mistake of facts, the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance trial was clearly erroneous in light of the spirit of substantial direct psychologicalism adopted by the Korean Criminal Procedure Act.

Unless there are extenuating circumstances to view that maintaining the first instance judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance trial is significantly unfair, or in full view of the results of the first instance examination and the results of the additional examination of evidence conducted until the closing of oral pleadings, the appellate court shall respect the judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance trial (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Do5313, Jun. 14, 2012). The lower court convicted the witness of the facts charged on the grounds of the legal statement made by the witness of the lower court E.

Examining the judgment of the court below closely by comparing it with the records, the above judgment of the court below is just, and there is no exceptional circumstance to reverse the judgment of the court below on the credibility of the witness E’s legal statement.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of facts is without merit.

B. As to the illegal sentencing, the Defendant’s age character and character intelligent environment, including the circumstances favorable to the Defendant (the amount of damage is relatively small, and the amount of fine has not been imposed on one occasion on around 2002, and the Defendant has no same power, etc.) and unfavorable circumstances (such as not agreed with the victim, and the damage has not been recovered).