The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, fraud took place on May 31, 2014.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant did not deceive the victim by speaking in the list of crimes Nos. 1, 3, and 4 of the list of crimes attached to the lower court (the number No. 1, 3, and 4 of the list of crimes attached to the lower court).

The victim was donated 30 million won to the defendant, and the defendant did not have the intention to obtain fraud.

Even according to the statement of the victim, the defendant did not talk with the victim by lending money to the victim, did not have the loan certificate, and there was no fact that the victim urged the payment to the defendant.

2) The Defendant did not deceive the victim of the number of crimes Nos. 3 and 4.

Since the victim voluntarily paid 1 million won and 730,000 won in the name of the cost of purchasing provisional charges to the defendant, there was no intention to acquire the defendant.

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

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. The judgment of the court below is consistent with the facts found by the evidence duly adopted and examined, that is, the defendant, by deceiving the victim as if he could find employment in the Spanco engineering, received money and used it as the repayment of other loans or the cost of living, and the victim cancelled and borrowed money for installment savings as the defendant needs to pay money, and the victim consistently stated that he would receive payment later, although the date of payment was not determined separately, he would receive payment later, and that he would have thought and delivered the above money later, in light of the victim's occupation, income level at the time of the victim's occupation, the process of raising funds, and the amount of payment, etc.

For the reason that it is reasonable to see that a loan was not made, the defendant was convicted.

B. 1) The lower court duly adopted and examined the evidence No. 1 of the list of crimes in the annexed Form 1 of the lower judgment.