The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the court below acquitted the defendant of this part of the facts charged on the grounds as stated in its holding, in light of the victim E's statement and the statement of each loan certificate on December 17, 2008 by the victim E, it can be acknowledged that the defendant acquired by deception of KRW 23 million from the damaged person, the court below acquitted the defendant of this part of the facts charged, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (one year of a suspended sentence of four months) is too unfortunate and unfair.

2. On December 17, 2008, the prosecutor held the Defendant not guilty on the ground that he/she applied for the amendment of an indictment to add the facts charged as stated in Paragraph 1, among the “criminal facts” as stated below, while maintaining the facts of the Defendant’s fraud as the primary facts charged. This court permitted this and changed the subject of the judgment for the trial.

As examined below, each crime of fraud, which was added in the trial, is found guilty, and which was found guilty at the above preliminary charges and each crime of fraud, which was found guilty at the court below, shall be sentenced to a single sentence pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act in relation to concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. As such, the entire judgment of the court below cannot

However, despite the above reasons for reversal of authority, the prosecutor's assertion of mistake as to the primary facts charged is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined.

3. Judgment on the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts

A. On December 17, 2008, the summary of the facts charged by the Defendant is that “A victim who is not aware of the assignment of points specified in the facts of the crime as indicated in the judgment of the court below shall immediately lend KRW 30 million to the victim who is not aware of the assignment,” and that “A victim shall make a notarial act and make a repayment without any mold,” and that the Defendant shall borrow KRW 23 million from the victim who is subject to the deduction of interest from the victim around that time.