The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, in collusion with D in this case, did not deceiving the victim and defraud the victim with money.

The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the charge is erroneous in the misconception of facts.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (four months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant denies that there was no fact in collusion with D to commit the instant crime.

However, in full view of the following circumstances that can be known from evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the defendant can be found to have acquired money by deceiving the victim in collusion with D as stated in the facts charged in this case.

(1) Although the Defendant and D together carried out apartment execution projects at the time, they did not have funds necessary therefor.

Therefore, the defendant and D have become the victim to raise funds using bonds, and to collect expenses for lending bonds.

However, the Defendant did not explain such circumstances to the victim.

When the defendant was investigated by the prosecution, if he explained this situation to the victim, he stated that the victim would not have lent money to the defendant.

(2) The defendant would sell two apartment bonds to the victim within six months.

As to one part, D was unable to obtain the approval of the housing construction project plan, and it was stated by the prosecution that it was impossible to do so, and that it was able to think together with the Defendant with the money urgency.

(3) The Defendant asserted that, since the Defendant borrowed money from the victim as collateral, the Defendant had the intent to repay the borrowed money to the Defendant, and that the Defendant did not deceive the victim.

However, as shown in the above facts of crime, the contents of deception against the victim are borrowed.