The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A. Although the defendant did not intend to acquire money by deceiving victims, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty all of the facts charged is erroneous in misconception of facts.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year and two months of imprisonment) is unreasonable.

Judgment

A. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, such as G, J and H’s respective original judgment and the statement of investigative agency, Defendant’s partial prosecutorial statement, entrusted operation contract, receipts, cafeterias and store contracts, etc., the instant facts charged may be fully convicted of all of the charges in light of the following circumstances:

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

(1) Regarding the fraud of the victim G, the Defendant entered into a contract with the FFFFFFFFFFFFF, without any particular business fund, and concluded the contract for the establishment of the FFFFFFFFF, but failed to provide the down payment of KRW 50 million on the part of the FFFFFFF, and subsequently suspended the removal work, and then entrusted the removal work to another construction business entity. ② Nevertheless, the Defendant did not notify this situation to the victim; ② the Defendant was unable to perform the removal work; ③ the victim had already been working for another construction business entity; ③ the victim demanded the settlement of expenses incurred under the contract; ③ the Defendant did not have the ability to repay at present; and ④ the Defendant did not fully reimburse the aforementioned construction expenses up to now. In light of the fact that the Defendant was unable to pay the construction expenses, as stated in its reasoning, and thus, could fully recognize the fact that the Defendant acquired property profits by allowing the victim to do so.

(2) the victim.