We reverse the judgment of the court below.

The punishment of the accused shall be determined by two years and ten months of imprisonment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the fraud part against the victim C by mistake of fact, the Defendant did not deceiving the victim C by stating that “an annual amount of KRW 700 million exists, and the maturity amount of KRW 800 million is 80 million.”

The amount stated in (1) 2 and 5 in the List of Crimes No. 1 in the judgment of the first instance court was not received by the defendant.

No. 4 No. 6 million won out of the 10 million won set forth in the No. 4 was received by the defendant, and the remaining 4 million won is only the drinking amount repaid by the victim C, not the money obtained by the defendant.

B. The punishment sentenced by each court below is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly examined and adopted as to the assertion of mistake of facts, there is a pension that the defendant had the victim C prior to maturity as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the first instance court.

In other words, it can be sufficiently recognized that the victim C is deceivingd.

The Defendant asserts that the victim C was aware of the fact that the maturity amount is not equivalent to KRW 80 million because the Defendant displayed the insurance policy, etc. to the victim C.

However, the time when the defendant shows the insurance policy to the victim C is already shown after the victim C was taken to obtain the money from the defendant, and the method of showing the amount already paid or the maturity amount was not enough to know in detail.

The Defendant filed an application for factual inquiry with respect to financial institutions by disputing the check or cash receipt portion [No. 2, 4, and 5 [No. 1] attached to the List of Crimes in the Judgment of KRW 1], excluding the account transfer portion among the amount acquired through deception.

However, as a result of factual inquiries, the defendant's endorsement was found on the back of some checks.

In addition, if the victim C’s photograph, which was stamped immediately before the victim’s delivery to the defendant, and the victim C had raised a large amount of money from the time when the victim paid the defendant the money, both the attached crime sight table (1) and the previous money are deceiving the victim C.