The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the defendant did not deceiving the victim of ability to repay, intent to repay, value of collateral, etc., and the victim delivered money in a mutual trust relationship with the defendant, so the victim does not deliver money by mistake by the defendant's deception.

2. The court below rejected the defendant's assertion in detail under the title "a judgment on the defendant's and defense counsel's assertion" in the judgment of the court below, which states that the defendant's assertion is identical to this part of the grounds for appeal, and the court below rejected the defendant's assertion. The defendant asserted that the victim, who had been in an internal relationship, donated the amount of damage of this case by using the restaurant equipment for the purchase of restaurant equipment, etc., but it is difficult to believe that the victim's statement was made under the pretext of the defendant's repayment of the borrowed money, such as the victim's reversal of the statement that he donated the above money under the pretext of the defendant's repayment of the borrowed money. The defendant stated that he prepared a certificate of loan by coercion of the victim around the time when he received seven million won out of the amount of damage of this case (Evidence No. 192 of the evidence record) was aware of the above money as a loan, and there is no intention of repayment, such as the defendant's assertion that he received the above money as a loan.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.