The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is the victim G and Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Etel No. 105 (hereinafter “the instant officetel”) with intent as well as the economic ability to refund the lease deposit at the time of entering into the lease agreement. However, the Defendant received temporary pressure to manage funds due to the occurrence of problems such as transfer of registration and settlement of balance with respect to the real estate sold by the Defendant after the commencement of the lease agreement. Moreover, the Defendant failed to make a registration of reduction according to the agreement with the victim because the value-added tax was not refunded at the time. However, the lower court determined that the Defendant intentionally received the lease deposit from the victim by deception, and that the lower court erred by misapprehending the fact.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. The judgment of the court below also asserted as the grounds for appeal, and the court below held that in the part of the judgment on the argument of the defendant and his defense counsel, the court below held that the agreement for registration of reduction is stipulated as the special terms of the real estate lease agreement entered into between the victim and the defendant, and the victim entered into a lease agreement on the ground that the real estate of this case can be sufficiently refunded if the registration of reduction was made as above, and that the victim would compel the defendant to register the reduction on November 20, 201, which was later than the 20th day of November 20, 201, when the defendant would not register the reduction by November 20, 201, which was later than the 20th day of the outstanding payment date.

“A letter of commitment to the purport and a promissory note of KRW 125 million for the remaining 135 million shall be paid to the Defendant and agreed to the extension of the said period. ③ The Defendant did not reduce the maximum debt amount of the right to collateral security by November 20, 201, which was promised with the victim, and ④ on December 27, 201, the Defendant used the amount of KRW 175 million in the name of the victim’s real estate located in Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government K on December 27, 201.