The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant did not commit deception, and the Defendant did not have any intention to obtain deception.

B. Even if the sentencing is found guilty against the defendant, the sentence of the lower court (10 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court, based on the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, found that it was difficult for the Defendant to take over the Defendant’s obligation KRW 110 million to the extent that the Defendant could not pay the interest on loans, construction costs, electricity charges, water charges, etc.

A summary of approximately KRW 200 million has been used in lending to the investigation agency. The victim did not know the above facts, if known, the victim stated that there was no reason to accept the debt, and ③ the defendant was convicted of the fraud of the above D and sentenced on May 14, 2015, and the judgment became final and conclusive on May 14, 2015 (in Incheon District Court Decision 2014No3237, 2014, and the crime of concurrent crimes of this case and Article 37 of the Criminal Act) (4) The defendant led to the confession of the facts charged in this case on the trial date of the court below, and the above confession did not have any circumstances to deem it false, the defendant can be recognized as the criminal intent of deception and deception.

Therefore, we cannot accept the defendant's above assertion.

B. The crime of this case, which judged unfair argument of sentencing, is a favorable circumstance that should consider equity in the case of the judgment at the same time in the relation of concurrent crimes between the crime of final and conclusive judgment and the crime of this case after Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

However, even though the amount of fraud of this case exceeds KRW 100,000, it has passed three years and three months or more from the date of the crime of this case, damage is still to be recovered.