The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Since the Defendant had a sufficient means of reimbursement until July 28, 2010 because he/she had real estate, automobiles, etc., the fact that he/she previously borrowed (attached Form 1 through 3, 5, and 10) is not defrauded.

B. In light of the fact that the Defendant is the primary offender of an unreasonable sentencing, and that the amount borrowed when there is the ability to repay is excluded, the amount acquired by deception was significantly reduced, the victims were paid or interest was paid, and that the lower court made an agreement with the victim H in the victim D, I, F and the case at the lower court, respectively, the lower court’s punishment (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The court below made a statement that "the defendant borrowed money from several persons to solve the debt that occurred in South Part K, and the real estate competition was not paid interest because it was not easy to settle the debt that occurred in South Part K," with respect to the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below as follows. The defendant had already been divorced from the husband around 1989, and there seems to be no reason to make a statement without any responsibility for the debt related to the husband. ② The defendant's 301 and Ma Apartment apartment Nos. 301 of Seocho-gu Seoul, Seoul, non-party No. 301 lot No. 301 and Ma apartment No. 301, which the defendant claimed as responsible property, are the defendant's bank, the Korean National Bank as the creditor of the defendant, and the N,O, A, P et al. are repeated and repeated (the investigation record No. 87, Oct. 10, 199).