The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant, who is aware of the fact, obtained the instant loan by deceiving D and E, and had the intent and ability to repay the loan, so there is no intention to commit fraud.

B. The sentence that the court below rendered unfair sentencing (the suspended sentence of KRW 5 million) is inappropriate.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. 1) According to the facts acknowledged by the lower court based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the Defendant would receive KRW 6 million from D and E, and the Defendant would have made a false statement with respect to a dump truck driving experience or a dump truck operation plan to obtain a loan of the instant dump truck for that purpose, and the Defendant was aware of the fact that the Defendant was not implementing a loan of the instant dump truck without the intention to operate the dump truck, and that the Defendant was aware of such circumstances.

As such, if the defendant makes a false representation to an employee in charge of lending a victim to omit the basis of the judgment on whether to grant a loan, and received a loan by the intention of the defective other party, there was the criminal intent of defraudation.

may be appointed by a person.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below to the same purport is just, and even after examining the records, no error is found in the process of finding facts by the court below.

2) On the contrary, the Defendant alleged to the effect that he had no intention to commit fraud because he had the ability and intent to repay the loan. However, whether the Defendant had the intention to repay the loan should be determined at the time of receiving the loan from the injured party. In full view of all the contents of the Defendant’s appeal reasons and all the circumstances indicated in the record, the Defendant was unable to repay the loan at the time of the loan.