The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant had intention or ability to repay the instant loan because he was engaged in the money exchange business, such as using the money received from the victim for most of the money exchange business.

Rather, the victim has remitted money as if the victim lent money to the defendant in order to exchange money to Macaro, but the victim was to prepare money with gambling funds at 17 days in 17 days, so the victim's statement that the victim acquired money from the defendant is not reliable.

Therefore, the defendant did not acquire money from the victim as stated in the facts charged.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (four months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant asserts the same purport as the Defendant alleged in the lower court’s judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal doctrine.

The court below rejected the assertion on the assertion under the title "the judgment on the argument of the defendant and the defense counsel".

Examining the following circumstances found by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the lower court’s judgment that found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged is justifiable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake and misapprehension of legal principles is without merit.

1) Around September 30, 2017, the Defendant received KRW 50 million from the victim, and transferred KRW 15.2 million to K from October 4, 2017 to October 13, 2017, KRW 25.77 million from October 8, 2017, and KRW 12.1.66 million from October 8, 2017 (In the Defendant’s account on 191-192 of the Investigation Records, not only remitted KRW 50 million from the victim during the above period, but also remitted KRW 2,638,00 from M, etc.

(2) The Defendant stated that the investigative agency only stated that J was money exchange and that K and L are not memory (a investigation record 146-147 pages).