The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant was authorized to conclude a subcontract regarding the instant civil engineering works.

P was subcontracted for the above construction work, and it was not known that P was subcontracted for the instant civil construction work to M until it was re-subcontracted for the victims.

Therefore, the defendant has no intention to commit fraud.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court (two years of suspended sentence for one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant also asserted the same purport in the lower court, but the lower court rejected the above assertion in detail by providing a detailed judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts.

If the court below examines the evidence duly adopted and examined in accordance with the records, the judgment of the court below is justified (in particular, in light of the fact that the defendant was aware that the J company had already been awarded a subcontract for the instant civil works but did not reach an agreement on the acceptance of civil works, and that on June 25, 2012, the defendant was receiving KRW 130 million from the victims to replace the M of the J company under construction for the instant civil works." In light of the fact that the defendant, at the time of receiving KRW 130 million from the victims, was aware that the J company was under subcontract for the instant civil works, at the time of receiving KRW 130 million from the victims.

Nevertheless, without notifying the victims of such circumstances, the defendant himself/herself is given a subcontract for the civil works of this case, and he/she received money as if the victims could immediately commence the works, so he/she can sufficiently recognize the criminal intent of deceptiveation). This part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. As to the wrongful argument of sentencing, there is no criminal conviction or suspended execution or more.