The judgment below

The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. 1) In relation to the fraud by deception of the cost of goods, the Defendant has endeavored to perform the contract by paying the amount of KRW 170,781,500 out of the total amount of KRW 303,781,500 supplied five times from the victim, and operated the company by means of prior transfer of the claim for the price of goods to be supplied to the government agency and payment of the cost of goods to the supplier company. In fact, the Defendant has paid the above KRW 170,781,50 to the victim by means of such method. In addition, there was no intention to commit fraud, 2) L/C (credit) fraud, the Defendant did not mean that “the victim has life jackets equivalent to KRW 80,00 from China,” and there was no possibility that the Defendant would not be supplied to the victim in accordance with the above standards of fraud, and there was no possibility that the Defendant would not be supplied the above cost of fraud.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts

A. As to the fraud of defraudation of the price of goods, insofar as the criminal intent of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of fraud, does not make a confession by the defendant, it shall be determined by comprehensively taking account of the objective circumstances such as the financial history, environment, details of the crime, and the process of execution of transaction before and after the crime. In the transaction of goods, whether fraud by defraudation was established is based on whether the victim had the intention or ability to pay the price of goods, even though there was no intention or ability to pay the price of goods to the victim as at the time of transaction