The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts (a crime of fraud against the victim J as stated in paragraph (3) of the crime at the time of original adjudication) is limited to the fact that the defendant had a criminal intent to acquire by deception against the victim J, and that he had not done the construction work normally in accordance with his direction, but the court below found the defendant guilty of this part of the charges, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, by misunderstanding the fact that the court below convicted the defendant of this part of the charges.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (three years of imprisonment) is excessively unreasonable.

(Defendants do not dispute the part of the compensation order among the judgment below) 2.

A. Determination on the assertion of mistake of facts is 1) Unless the defendant makes a confession, the crime of deception, which is a subjective constituent element of the crime, shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the objective circumstances such as the defendant's financial history, environment, details of the crime, and the process of performing transactions before and after the crime (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do8781, Jan. 18, 2008). In addition, in the case of fraud involving property taking advantage of property, if there is a property giving due to deception, it constitutes a crime of fraud by itself, thereby infringing the victim's property, and even if there was considerable price paid or there was no damage to the victim's entire property, it does not affect the establishment of the crime of fraud (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200Do1899, Jul. 7, 200).