The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant merely stated that K was in need of money, and did not hold a talk that the Defendant was carrying on duty-free shop business to the victim.

In addition, the defendant had the ability to pay money to the victim.

Therefore, the defendant deceivings the victim.

However, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in fact.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court (two years of suspended sentence in October) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court may recognize the fact of deceiving the victim.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of factual mistake is rejected.

(1) At the investigative agency and the court of the court below, the victim mentioned that he would have lent money to the investigative agency and the court of the court below that he would be able to make a big profit by selling

The statements are consistently made.

The injured party mentioned the staff of the Defendant to be able to do so.

The contents of the statement are specific and relatively consistent.

② The Defendant stated that K is also required to make money, and K seems to have recommended the victim to make an investment or loan.

In this regard, the victim's money was used by all the defendant, and K hardened with the defendant, or there seems to be no particular reason to recommend the victim to the victim, not the fact that he/she had consulted with the defendant.

On the contrary, while the defendant received 100 million won in total from the damaged party through the K's arrangement, it is difficult to accept in a common sense to find out what talks about the victim.

(3) The defendant shall use the victim's money for the purpose of gathering it.