All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles merely merely receive payments for indecent acts from the victim E, but they did not receive money under the name of funds for the purpose of acquiring the right to operate the restaurant as shown in the facts charged, and there was no intent to commit deception or fraud. However, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the misunderstanding of facts, or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby convicting the Defendant of the facts charged in this case.

(2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (eight months of imprisonment and two years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

가. 피고인의 사실오인 및 법리오해 주장에 대한 판단 원심이 적법하게 채택하여 조사한 증거들, 특히 그 진술의 일관성 및 구체성에 비추어 볼 때 충분히 믿을 만한 피해자 E의 수사기관 내지 원심법정에서의 진술과 문자메시지 출력물(증거기록 36∽45면)에 의하면, 피고인이 피해자 E에게 공소사실 기재와 같이 청와대에 근무하는 사람이나 대기업 회장 등을 통해 함바식당 운영권을 취득하게끔 할 수 있는 것처럼 기망하여 로비자금 내지 교통비 명목으로 합계 6,600만 원을 편취한 사실이 넉넉히 인정된다.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake and misapprehension of legal principles cannot be accepted.

B. In light of the circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant and the prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing, namely, the contents of the instant crime committed by deceiving 66 million won as if they were to give the right to operate the restaurant by solicitation of senior personnel and by deceiving 66 million won, and the amount obtained by deceiving 66 million won, the nature of the relevant crime is not somewhat weak. Nevertheless, there is no attitude of appraisal or reflection of the crime of true and sincere punishment, such as fraud, public conflict, embezzlement, etc., on several occasions.