The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. On February 2012, the Defendant borrowed KRW 30 million from the victimN (hereinafter “N”) on or around February 2, 2012, the Defendant borrowed 30 million from the victim.

However, on March 2012, 2012, after the Defendant entered into a franchise agreement with the Defendant, he received franchise fees from the Defendant, and did not supply materials, the franchise owner made a port to the Defendant. In order to solve this, the Defendant, N, and franchise store owners agreed to refund the franchise fees of KRW 30 million to the franchise owner, instead of paying the franchise fees, the Defendant paid 30 million in full.

Therefore, even though the Defendant did not deceptionN and did not have the intention to commit fraud, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged.

B. The Defendant, with respect to intimidation, did not make a statement to the victim AR (hereinafter referred to as “AR”) or as if he had expressed any harm to the AR or his family members, but the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the charges by misunderstanding the facts.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following facts or 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: (i) the Defendant sent a small and medium enterprise application document to AP under the name of AP, and only passed the first document examination at the time when the Defendant borrowed money from AP; (ii) the Defendant explained that it was almost final and conclusive to receive money from AO; and (iii) the Defendant stated that the 27-day capital execution was final and the actual visit was a formal procedure, and the Defendant asserted in the grounds of appeal.