The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the fact that the defendant received annual salary of KRW 100 million a year at the time of receiving the money as investment funds from E, and paid interest for a considerable period of time to E and H, among the facts charged, the fraud of E, the fraud of July 7, 2009, and the fraud of November 18, 2009, and the fraud of November 18, 2009, there is no intention to commit fraud. Therefore, the judgment of the court below that recognized fraud as to each of the above facts charged is erroneous.

B. The sentence of the court below that sentenced the imprisonment of one year and two months is too unreasonable in light of the fact that the defendant, who is an insurance solicitor of unreasonable sentencing, has spent excessive expenses in order to pay his or her obligations, caused to the crime of this case, the defendant's health status, home environment, and voluntary attendance at the police and was investigated, etc.

2. Determination

A. (1) According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the defendant was found to have received KRW 20 million from E under the pretext of investment in the fund and used it to repay obligations to other creditors. In addition to the defendant's statement at the prosecutor's office that "any other damage is caused and any other damage is caused and any other damage is caused and any other damage is caused and any other damage is caused and any other damage is caused to E", even if the defendant received money from E, it shall be deemed to have induced E by deceiving E even though he did not intend to invest in the fund.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is not erroneous because it is recognized that the defendant had the intention of defraudation.

(2) According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, the Defendant borrowed money from another person from around 2004 or 2005.