The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant is a person who engages in credit business and loan brokerage business in the name of “E” and “F” under the name of “E” and “F”.

On October 2010, the Defendant, at the coffee shop located in the Busan National University, made a false representation of the total amount of KRW 60 million and received interest, etc. from the victim G at the coffee shop in front of the Busan National University, stating to the effect that “H, a person in need of funds to extend the factory, loans KRW 60,000,000,000 to H, and shall pay the principal and interest each month.” In addition, the Defendant, from the following month, provided that “The principal and interest shall be paid in 1,00,000 won, and the company shares shall also be issued.”

However, even if the Defendant received money from the victim, the Defendant lent the full amount of KRW 60 million to the said H, and not only did there were no intent to receive the interest but also did not acquire part of the said money.

On October 2010, the Defendant: (a) received 9.8 million won (one million won credit) from the victim of the instant Busan University from the victim; (b) continued to receive 49 million won (one million won credit with the Defendant’s first bank account number J) from the Defendant’s son on November 5, 2010; and (c) received 58.8 million won (one million won credit with the Defendant’s first bank account number J) on two occasions on two occasions, and (d) lent only 29.8 million won to H on two occasions.

Accordingly, the defendant deceivings the victim, thereby deceiving the victim 29 million won.

2. The lower court’s judgment: (a) there was no fact that the victim G lent money to a third party via the Defendant and collected the principal and interest; (b) the document of loan of KRW 60 million was made in the name of H; and (c) the victim asked H to return the interest and the principal by directly phone call to H as the victim was not paid the interest; and (d) there was no fact that H demanded H to the effect that the amount borrowed by the victim is less than KRW 60 million; and (b) on January 30, 201, the same person was delegated by H.