The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court convicted the Defendant of the facts charged in the instant case, although the Defendant had the intent or ability to actively perform his duties at the construction site of this case under a contract with the victim, by misapprehending the legal principles, and thereby, found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged. The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles or misapprehending the legal principles.

B. The lower court’s punishment (six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and 80 hours of community service order) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In fact-misunderstanding or misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendant concluded a contract with the victim on January 12, 2015 with the content of “the commencement date of construction; February 23, 2015; the total construction cost of KRW 70 million;” and the fact that the victim paid the amount recorded in the facts constituting the lower judgment to the Defendant by February 5, 2015 is also recognized.

Accordingly, according to the victim's statement, the victim's completion was close on February 16, 2015 when the victim visited the site and did not work as a foundation even at the time, and the defendant did not go to the site and did not end the construction work without contact after that day. The victim's photograph (36 pages of evidence records) and the letter of confirmation of human body are consistent with this.

In addition, the Defendant purchased a drama with the price paid by the victim and supplied it to a permitted site outside the instant site, and used at least KRW 50 million as the construction cost received from the injured party.

However, the basis for supporting this could not be submitted.

The Defendant stated that the damaged person’s electric extension and urban gas extension charges, etc., which were irrelevant to the terms of the contract, were suspended by the Defendant. However, according to the victim’s statement, the Defendant’s electric extension and urban gas extension will have the effect of the contract.

It is weak that it was set.

Also, according to the statements of one victim.