The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the complainants of this case by mistake of the facts did not have the intention to actually perform the work at the lele business operated by the defendant, by deceiving the defendant as if they were to do so, and by deceiving the defendant as the borrowed money, and then, to avoid the change, they reached the complaint of this case in order to avoid the change. Thus, even though the defendant was guilty of fraud from the above complainants, the court below ordered the defendant to collect 60 million won on the sole basis of the above complainant's statement, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding of the fact that the defendant

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (the imprisonment of six months and the suspension of the execution of two years, the additional collection of twenty million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine the factual assertion. The following circumstances found by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, the defendant at the prosecutor's office: ① received more than half of the total amount of 80,000 won per day from October 13, 2014 to October 31, 2014 from the average of 10-15 visitors per capita, and acquired the remainder by paying half of the total amount of 80,000 won per capita (Evidence No. 1,40 of the evidence record). ② From November 1, 2014 to November 8, 2014, the defendant acquired half of the total amount of 80,000 won per day from the average of 10 customers (Evidence No. 1, 143 of the evidence record), and the defendant acquired half of the total amount of 10,000 won from the average of 10,000 won per head 8,000 won per day (Evidence No. 1, 143 of the evidence record).