The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In the event of borrowing money from D, the Defendant does not constitute a crime of fraud on the ground that there is no intention to acquire money by deception due to the intent to repay and the ability to repay the money.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one million won of a fine) is excessively unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the criminal intent of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of fraud, has to be determined by comprehensively taking account of the objective circumstances such as the financial history, environment, details and details of the crime before and after the crime, and the process of performing transactions, etc. (Supreme Court Decision 2004Do8651 Decided March 24, 2005). According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the defendant stated that ① the defendant would have repaid three parts of the lending company to the victim who was an employee of the textile factory at the time of August 2008 in order to pay the interest on loans, etc. (i) to the victim who was the employee of the textile factory at the time of the textile plant at KRW 30,000,000,000,000 to the bank account under the name of the defendant at the time of borrowing KRW 20,000,000,000,000,000.