The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the victim H.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In relation to the crime of fraud against the victim H, the defendant did not agree with K to use the price discounted with K for the repayment of the existing debt with K, and with regard to the crime of fraud against the victim C, it did not receive investment funds from the victim C who engaged in the business, or borrowed money under the pretext of entitling, and therefore, the court below found the defendant guilty of each of the above charges of fraud. The judgment below erred by misapprehending the legal principles or by misapprehending the legal principles which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. As to the sentencing unfair (defendants and prosecutors) sentenced by the court below (one year of imprisonment), the defendant asserts that the prosecutor is too unfasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. Determination 1 on the assertion of misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles as to the crime of fraud against the victim H) The summary of the facts charged is as follows: (a) on July 2013, the Defendant: (b) on the manufacturing of agricultural products by the Defendant’s operation, located in the Busan Shipping Daegu FF building 1630, the manufacturing industry chain office; and (c) on the victim H, it is necessary to purchase 50 million won to purchase Dora field of 4500 square meters in the first ground of Seopopopopopo City, Seopopopopopo City, Jeju; and (d) to purchase Dorain for 2

The loan of KRW 50 million for the purchase cost of Dora is used to purchase Dora's total of KRW 50 million for the purchase of Dora.

“A false statement,” and that member was transferred from the victimized person to the corporate bank account in the name of the Defendant on August 7, 2013 as the purchase price for Dora on August 7, 2013.

However, in fact, the Defendant already received KRW 50 million from the Defendant on July 2013, 201, from the J, the owner of the said land, before receiving the transfer of KRW 50 million from the Defendant, and agreed with K to use the purchase price at a discount of approximately KRW 10 million, and the discounted amount to pay the Defendant’s debt to the Defendant’s K, thereby receiving KRW 50 million from the damaged person.