The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The victim of mistake of facts knew the F (hereinafter “Training Institute”)’s operational status, and entered into the instant consignment service contract. At the time of entering into the entrusted meal contract, the Defendant had ability to repay more assets than the obligation related to the operation of the Training Institute, and thus, the Defendant could not be deemed to have deceiving the victim. Thus, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (one year of imprisonment) is excessively unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant, at the office of the Defendant’s operation of the 3rd floor of the Dobong-gu Seoul E-building on December 2, 2010, the Defendant was liable for debts exceeding 10 billion won, and in particular, at the time of issuance of promissory notes equivalent to KRW 10 billion with the maturity of the end of July 2010, and from around July 2010, the Defendant was unable to pay monthly salary of employees. Therefore, even if the Defendant entered into the said F entrusted food contract with the victim and received the said deposit money, the Defendant would have the victim conduct the entrusted food business for 3 years from the above F, or would have the victim conduct the entrusted food business for 20 days from the above F, and would have received the said KRW 20 billion from the Defendant under the name of the lessee on December 21, 2010, the lower court received the said money under the name of the Defendant’s deposit account under the name of the victim on February 21, 2002.