The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is not the Defendant’s promise to pay the victim C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim Co., Ltd.”) goods such as air conditioners, but the Defendant is not the person who delivers a new bank passbook and a check card in the name of the Defendant to the victim Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim Co., Ltd.”), and the person who is supplied goods such as air conditioners from the victim company is F.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case that he acquired the amount equivalent to the price of goods from the victim company was erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.

2. The judgment of the court below and the court below acknowledged the following circumstances based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, namely, ① the Defendant, a trade name E (hereinafter “E”) with respect to the installation of air conditioners, etc. (hereinafter “H”), together with F, with the business name of H in the same industry, was assigned to the Defendant, and the role of performing the construction of air conditioners is carried out by F, and the Defendant’s role of performing the construction of air conditioners was carried out in the same manner with F, respectively, and the Defendant could no longer supply the outstanding amount to the Defendant’s 2,30,000 won of air conditioners in EM factories (hereinafter “this case’s construction work”) (Evidence 2,80,80,276-278, supra), and ② the Defendant could no longer supply the outstanding amount to the Defendant, who was a person in charge of the construction of the instant construction work, by providing the victim with goods at the time of the actual operation of the construction work.”