The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. 50,00 won that the defendant received from the victim of the mistake of facts is not an investment but a loan, and at that time there was no intention or ability to make a repayment, and therefore there was no intention to defraud the victim.

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

2. Determination

A. According to the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, namely, ① according to the victim’s police statement and the court below’s legal statement, and the statement in a copy of the same business contract, the defendant stated to the effect that “the victim will transfer 10% of the interests in the lawsuit and guarantee monthly profits,” and the victim believed to have paid 50 million won as the consideration for the acquisition of the above shares to the defendant on November 14, 2011. ② The defendant was operating a restaurant outside of the lawsuit of this case, but the amount of 20 million won per month was less than 20 million won per month. ③ The defendant paid 18.1 million won per month from December 201 to September 2012, the defendant did not notify the victim of the above business contract, and thus, he did not fully recognize the defendant’s share in the charges of this case to have been disposed of to K with 400 million won as the defendant’s share in the charges of this case.

B. The favorable circumstance is that the Defendant paid a total of KRW 18.1 million until September 2012 according to the terms of the agreement on the business in question.

However, the victim believed the defendant and invested 50,000 won most of his retirement allowances, and it appears that the victim suffered considerable damage due to the instant case, and the damage was not agreed with the victim and the damage was not recovered.