The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, there was no sale due to the fault of the victim, and since the victim provided the two rooms of officetels under the instant project with substitute payment, there was no deception of the victim or fraud of money.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court (eight months of imprisonment and two years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s judgment and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the first instance court as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the fact that the Defendant deceptioned the victim as stated in the facts charged and received the security deposit can be acknowledged.

① At the time when the Defendant entered into a contract for vicarious sale with the victim, the instant project was suspended due to the subcontractor’s failure to pay the construction cost, and the Defendant concluded a contract for sale with the victim to pay the construction cost as the sale price.

② Therefore, insofar as the sales contract was concluded and the sales price was not paid smoothly, it was difficult to immediately resume the instant business, but the Defendant did not speak about the fact that the construction was suspended due to financial problems (Evidence Nos. 155) and said that the construction was suspended due to the modification of the design.

③ Even after the termination of the contract for vicarious sale with the victim, the construction was not resumed for a considerable period of time since the problem of the construction cost of the instant project was not resolved. Ultimately, on September 2014, the construction was terminated, and the construction was conducted by selecting Posman as Posman (Evidence No. 159). On November 27, 2014, after the resumption of the construction, the sales contract was concluded again around November 27, 2014 (the trial record No. 67 pages).