The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact misunderstanding 1) The Defendant borrowed money or a motor vehicle from the injured party while receiving an investment of KRW 3 billion from W, but later the said investment did not provide money to the injured party. The Defendant did not intend to deceive the injured party from the beginning or to obtain money from the accused.

2) As to the facts charged in the instant case No. 2, the victim did not confirm the Defendant’s intention and voluntarily paid the Defendant’s membership fees on behalf of the Defendant, and the Defendant did not promised to pay the victim the money equivalent to the above membership fees.

B. The lower court’s sentence against an unfair defendant in sentencing (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant

A. 1) First, we examine the Defendant’s assertion that 3 billion won was invested from W.

In full view of the Defendant’s statements related to W’s 3 billion won investment, the Defendant received from W the above 50 billion won amount equivalent to 10% of the above 500 billion won’s underground funds if finding the 500 billion won of the Government’s underground funds. However, it appears to the effect that W borrowed money for expenses incurred in finding the above underground funds, and that W borrowed money for the purpose of paying 3 billion won to W and then intended to repay the amount of borrowed money, etc. to the victim.

However, there is no evidence to support the above argument of the defendant or W.

B. As to the facts charged in the instant case, according to the victim’s statement, the victim’s statement that “at the time when following the victim’s statement, the Defendant would have received KRW 10 billion from the Defendant to organize a factory in China” means the Defendant’s lending of money to the Defendant, and thus, the Defendant would have received an investment of KRW 3 billion from W.