The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant of mistake of fact was unable to receive construction cost from another construction site, and only used the instant construction cost that was received from the victim at another construction site, and did not have the intent to obtain fraud at the time of concluding the instant construction contract with the victim.

B. The court below's six-month punishment of imprisonment imposed on the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The intent of the crime of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of the crime of fraud to determine the mistake of facts, is to be determined by comprehensively taking account of the objective circumstances such as the Defendant’s financial history, environment, details of the crime, and the process of transaction before and after the crime unless the Defendant confessions. The intent of the crime is sufficient, not a conclusive intention, but a willful negligence.

(1) The Defendant concluded a construction contract with J on February 28, 2008 and concluded a construction contract with KRW 2007Do10416, May 8, 2008; and (2008Do1652, May 8, 2008). The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court, namely, ① the Defendant concluded a construction contract with J on January 28, 2013 with respect to construction of Fri-gu O and P ground buildings in Busan, with the construction period of KRW 125 million until March 10, 2013; the construction price of KRW 125 million from January 30 to April 10, 2013; the construction price of KRW 300,000 from J on April 10, 2013 to KRW 300,000,000,000 from the victim’s construction period of KRW 600 among the above construction works; and the construction price of KRW 1300,0130,2000.