The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Reasons for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant did not deceiving the victim by deceiving the victim, on the ground that he did not conclude a contract of carriage of waste coal materials within the Y of Chungcheongnam-do to the outside, or did not intend to establish a security for the investment funds.

B. The sentence of the lower court (an amount of four million won) that is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated in the lower court’s determination as to the assertion of mistake of fact: (i) the victim consistently entered into a contract of carriage of waste coal materials out of the Chungcheongnam-Naman F.

to the extent that the corporation has paid the money;

A statement is made; ② The Defendant’s receipt of a letter of loan also stated that “the above amount shall be given part of the share in the agreement that the Defendant operates with the FMM in the form of loan and loan terms; ③ However, the above transport contract was not concluded, and the Defendant did not use the above amount for any purpose other than the expenses of the above transport contract; ④ there was no talk about the establishment of the security; however, the Defendant has been accurately aware of the land made by the Defendant as security; ⑤ there was a text message about it; ⑤ there was a victim’s receipt of payment within one month from the Defendant; ⑤ there was a text message about it; ⑤ there was a victim’s receipt of payment from the Defendant; and the victim did not conclude the above transport contract; and even if there was no talk about the security, it appears that the Defendant was unaware of the said money only by the Defendant’s words within one month.

B. The fact that a considerable amount of damages for the determination of unfair sentencing has been repaid is a favorable crime.