The judgment of the first instance is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date of the final judgment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant notified the victim that he would use the investment funds for the new Z commercial building construction project, and received money from the victim.

In the sales contract of I building 201, L conducting the above business is received from K to raise funds for the Z commercial construction project and provided to the victim, etc.

Despite that, the first instance court erred by misunderstanding the fact that the defendant was guilty.

B. The first instance sentencing (six months of imprisonment) on the accused is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The evidence duly adopted and examined by the first instance court as to the assertion of mistake of facts, and the reasons for the judgment of the first instance and the reasons for appeal of the defendant are closely compared with those of the above reasons for appeal, and the defendant, even in the first instance court, rejected the above allegations by the first instance court in detail with the summary of the defendant's assertion and its judgment after the facts constituting the crime.

The circumstances that were additionally recognized in the trial by the above evidence are as follows.

① A consistent statement is made that not only the victim but also the defendant has invested money in the construction project of the I building.

② Even if the Defendant stated that he would invest money in the Z commercial construction project to the victim, K provided the sales contract No. 201 with the I building No. 201 was first used to cover the costs of the I building construction project.

In addition, K stated that 201 of the I building 201 should clarify ownership relationship by settling accounts after the completion of the project.

Ultimately, in the event that the above sales contract that the defendant provided as security to the victim, etc. is not sufficiently financed by K, it is insufficient to play a security role for the victim, etc., and the defendant could recognize it.

The facts and circumstances mentioned by the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows.