The judgment below

The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles, the Defendant performed the contract by bringing in all steel-frames worth KRW 410 million until the intermediate payment is paid in accordance with the contract entered in the facts charged in the instant case, but subsequently, the lower court failed to complete the contract due to the conflict of opinions, lack of funds, etc. with the co-defendant B. Thus, the Defendant did not have the intention of defraudation.

In addition, even if the intention of defraudation is recognized at the time of receipt of the intermediate payment, the part of the down payment should be excluded from the amount of fraud of this case as the defendant has the intent and ability to perform the above contract sufficiently at least at the time of receipt of the down payment.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and legal principles.

B. The punishment of the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the lower court also asserted the same as the grounds for appeal.

In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court of the court below, the court below can sufficiently recognize that the defendant concluded a contract with the victim H limited company (hereinafter “victim company”) as stated in the facts charged of this case (hereinafter “the contract of this case”) and had an intention to allow the contract of this case even if he did not perform the contract of this case at the time when he received the down payment and the intermediate payment.

In light of the above, the defendant was pronounced guilty.

A) The Defendant and B (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant, etc.”) together with the Defendant and B (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant, etc.”) operate the N Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “N”) and operate the F Co., Ltd. established and operated by B due to tax delinquency, etc.