The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstanding 1) As to the crime of fraud 2016 Highest 2147 fraud, the Defendant was paid KRW 70 million out of KRW 179 million from G, which was paid by G, was a nominal investment of the lease deposit, not the counter-purchase price (it is not possible to lease in the name of G) and the remainder of KRW 190 million is a business operation fund invested by G, which was fully aware of the circumstances of the Defendant’s company, with the intent of the Defendant’s company, and the Defendant did not commit deception.

2) Paragraph 1 of Article 2016 Highest 5046 highest 1, 4046 highest 5046 highest 1: The money paid to M as the price for the J share trading to M does not have been paid as the price for the J's investment. Therefore, the Defendant did not have a deceptive act by deception.

B) Paragraph 4: Since T was aware of the Defendant’s corporate situation and was able to obtain a loan under its own name and thereafter to operate the J directly, there was no deception by deception against the Defendant.

B. The sentence of the lower court (three years of imprisonment) against an unfair defendant in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant also asserted that the aforementioned facts were the same as the assertion of mistake in the lower court, and the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the grounds of its determination in detail.

The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below in the court below, i.e., ① the victim consistently purchased a team from the two MNlon Co., Ltd. in the victim’s name through the introduction of the defendant to the public trial in the court below during the investigation process, and the remaining balance was based on the capital contract and the machinery use method from the defendant.

A statement is made and the victim and the two M MTs theory.