The judgment below

The remainder, excluding a compensation order, shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the instant loan loan does not mean that it was borrowed under the name of establishing the F store, and at the time, the victim C was fully aware of the financial situation of the Defendant, and there was the Defendant’s intentional deception or deception.

Although it cannot be seen, the judgment of the court below which found guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination 1 on the argument of mistake of facts in the lower court also asserted the same as the grounds for appeal, and the lower court rejected the above argument by the Defendant on the ground that, according to the evidence in its holding, the victim C could have anticipated that the wife of the above victim would open the store by taking care of the operation of the store after lending the above money, and the Defendant also knew that the victim C would open the store between the victim and the Defendant, as if the victim C would open the store between 1.5 million won and the Defendant, who cannot be deemed to have been economically difficult at that time, and it cannot be said that the payment is uncertain as the victim and his wife lent KRW 1.5 million to the Defendant who was economically difficult at that time.

2) A thorough examination by comparing the above judgment of the court below with the records, and this is not sufficient to recognize the defendant's assertion that the defendant and the victim C had already been involved in the establishment of the F store at the time of borrowing the loan of this case only with the statement of the witness H of the party at the time of borrowing the loan of this case. ② Rather, the contents of the Kakao Stockholm conversation exchanged between the defendant and the victim and the whole flow correspond to the victim's statement that the loan of this case was erroneous and discussed the issue related to the establishment of the F store for a considerable period before and after the loan of this case. ③