The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) is that the Defendant was granted F the exclusive right to sell medical devices in Korea from F to F to promote medical devices, and thus, is not deceiving the victim.

Even if the defendant did not have the exclusive right to sell the Republic of Korea

Even if there is room to interpret the Korean sales right as the Korean exclusive sales right, and there is room to interpret such Korean sales right as the Korean exclusive sales right, so the victim was accused of the victim as if he had no authority over F.

shall not be deemed to exist.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the fact that the court below judged otherwise and found the defendant guilty.

2. Determination

A. The deception as a requirement for fraud refers to all affirmative and passive acts that have to comply with each other in the transactional relationship with property, and it does not necessarily require false indication as to the important part of a juristic act, and it is sufficient to view that it is the basis of judgment in order for the actor to take a disposition of property which he wishes by omitting the other party into mistake. Therefore, in a case where it is recognized that the other party to the transaction would not have been engaged in the transaction if he was notified of certain circumstances, the person who receives the property has a duty to notify the other party of such circumstances in advance in accordance with the principle of good faith. Nevertheless, the failure to notify the other party of the fact that the transaction would have been deceiving the other party, and thereby constitutes a crime of fraud (see Supreme Court Decision 2003Do7828, Apr. 9, 2004). (b) The following circumstances can be found by evidence duly adopted and duly examined by the court below, i.e., the victim D's right to sell the property to the victim in Korea to the investigation agency of the lower judgment.

(b).