The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The Defendant’s net F, referring to the mistake of facts, gave the Defendant a borrowed-name share within the Taedong Group, but failed to prove the Defendant’s status as the Defendant due to the wind that could not be converted into the real name in the name of the Defendant, and accordingly, the lower court convicted the Defendant of the facts charged of the instant fraud. The lower court erred by misapprehending the facts,

The imprisonment (six months of imprisonment) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

Judgment

In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined at the court below's determination of facts, namely, when the defendant examines the police, he had the victim receive money from E whenever he needs to do so, and the victim's money from E was used in both personal living expenses, etc., and the defendant stated that the defendant was both E and the victim; the victim D's 25th floor building known that the defendant was the subsidiary of the solar group during the police investigation process was merely the fiveth floor building; the defendant stated that he was the director's address; the defendant stated that he was the director's address; the second class of the Taedong Group's 25th floor building was merely the fiveth floor building; the defendant was qualified or ability to become the chairman; or there is no evidence to deem that the victim was the intent or ability to accept the money from the victim, as stated in the facts charged in this case.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

The defendant does not oppose the allegation of unfair sentencing while denying the instant crime, and the defendant has two times of punishment for the same crime of fraud, one time of suspended sentence, one time of fine, and one time of punishment.