The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant, by borrowing money from the victim C, did not deceiving the victim as to the method of raising funds to repay out of his/her intended purpose, and had the intent or ability to repay the borrowed money.

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

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined in the lower court’s determination as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant used the money borrowed from the injured party at the time of the instant case to pay the attorney’s fees, taxes in arrears, etc., and can be recognized that the Defendant acquired the borrowed money by making a false statement to the injured party even though he did not have the intent or ability to repay the borrowed money. Therefore, this part of the Defendant’

B. Each of the crimes of this case with regard to the determination of the illegality of sentencing is a favorable circumstance where the equality with the case where each of the crimes of this case is judged at the same time in the relation of concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act with the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (the re-violation of mediation)

On the other hand, the fact that the amount of damage to the crime of this case exceeds KRW 368,500,000,000, did not take measures for recovery of damage, such as agreement, and that the defendant was punished several times for the same crime, and even if he had been punished for repeated crime, each crime of this case was committed again, and that the defendant committed the crime of this case again, even if he had been in the period of repeated crime, and that he continued to reverse his statement from the investigative agency to the trial by going through the trial of the court below, and that he was extremely urgent to avoid his liability by consistently

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the circumstances leading up to the instant crime, the circumstances following the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, and environment, etc., the lower court’s punishment seems to be excessive and unfair.