The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (1) misunderstanding of facts (A) The Defendant did not pay the cost of telecommunications construction to the victim because he was unable to receive the cost of construction from H, a contractor, so there was no criminal intent to defraud the Defendant.

(B) There was no pecuniary benefit from the Defendant’s property due to telecommunications construction works executed by the victim, and there was no intention to illegally obtain the Defendant.

Even if C or H, a factory owner, acquired property benefits, there was no intention of illegal acquisition by the defendant.

(2) The sentence of the judgment of the court below on unreasonable sentencing (the fine of KRW 20 million) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor: The sentence of the judgment of the court below on unreasonable sentencing is excessive and unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake that there was no criminal defendant's deceptionation

A. Around February 2017, the summary of the facts charged in the instant case stated that “The Defendant would make a payment of KRW 66 million (including value-added tax) to the victim D for the part of telecommunications construction work among C factory construction works at the C factory construction site located in Chungcheongnam-nam Budget Group B, and that “The Defendant would make an advance payment of KRW 40,000,000 (including value-added tax) within one month after the commencement of the construction work.”

However, in fact, the defendant did not secure the cost of construction to be paid to the victim, and the defendant did not have an intention or ability to pay the cost of construction to a large number of subcontractors within one month and to settle the cost of construction according to the end of each month, even though he had already been paid the cost of construction by the original office about KRW 592 million, which is about 90 million, excluding the value-added tax.

As above, the Defendant deceiving the victim and had the victim take part in the telecommunications construction work from February 2, 2017 to April 20, 2017, and did not pay KRW 66 million to the victim’s economic benefits.