The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, misunderstanding of the legal principles, the Defendant invested in the bonds by receiving fraternity payments from the members of the fraternity including the victim, but did not give the money that the victim promised by failure to make an investment, and did not intend to acquire money from the damaged person under the pretext of fraternity payments.

B. The sentence of the lower court (an amount of five million won) which is unfair in sentencing is excessively unreasonable.

2. Determination

가. 사실 오인 내지 법리 오해 원심은 ① 피고인은 2015. 10. 경 피고인의 주거지 보증금을 위 계원 이자 채권자인 E에게 양도하는 등 피해 자로부터 계 불입금을 받기 시작할 무렵부터 자금사정이 매우 나빴던 점, ② 2015. 12. 경 계원 F 등과 함께 이 사건 계를 파기할 것을 의논하였으나 피해자에게는 이와 같은 사정을 전혀 알리지 아니한 점, ③ 이 사건 계의 계원들 중 피해자와 G을 제외한 계원들은 현실적으로 계 불입금을 지급하지 아니하고, 피고인에 대한 이자 채권과 위 계 불입금 지급 채무를 상계하는 방식으로 이를 납부하고 있었던 점에 비추어 보면, 피고인이 피해자를 기망하여 돈을 편취한 것으로 인정할 수 있다고

The decision was determined.

In addition to the above judgment of the court below, even if there is no judicial defect that the rest of the members except the victim and G did not actually pay the fraternity, other members are actually paying the fraternity and maintaining the fraternity dependent on the defendant's own ability without actual payment is a very important factor in determining the stability of the fraternity of this case. Thus, the act of not notifying such fact constitutes deception against the victim because it is very important factor in determining the stability of the fraternity of this case.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and it is alleged by the defendant.