The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of the instant case, the Defendant had the intention to acquire the price of goods by deception because the Defendant had been engaged in normal business activities.

subsection (b) of this section.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found all of the facts charged of this case guilty is erroneous by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of two-year imprisonment sentenced by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, namely, H agreed to receive KRW 6 million from the Defendant by March 22, 2016, when supplying two tables to the Defendant on March 18, 2016.

“The statement to the effect that “” (the trial record 58-59 pages), 2. The victim I would supply the steel at the court of original instance, 25 days after the 2 months following the 2-month period when the Defendant supplied the steel.

from January 22, 2016 to the same year

4. From 18 to 15 times, the Defendant supplied approximately KRW 290 million to the Defendant with steel materials worth KRW 290 million.

“The fact that the Defendant stated to the effect that the supply of steel was suspended due to the default of payment (of note, 72-73 pages), ③ the Defendant appears to have received steel materials from the victim I (of note, 85 pages of the trial record). ④ the Defendant had no corporate bonds around January 2016 (of note, 1:3:4) and around April 2016, the Defendant was unable to pay wages to employees belonging to the Defendant’s company (of note, 2016 senior group 6086 evidence records, 1:4:00,000,000). In light of the economic condition of the Defendant’s default on payment of the goods (of note, 2016 senior group 5896 evidence records, 5896 senior group 71, 2016 senior group 6086 senior group 1:53 of the evidence records, 2016 senior group 6086). Ultimately, the Defendant appears to have reached the economic condition of the Defendant’s non-payment on June 16, 2016.