The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. When the Defendant borrowed the money from the victim, the Defendant had a claim for the construction cost exceeding KRW 400 million against the Rapha Medical Foundation, and had the intent and ability to repay the said borrowed money.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case on the premise that the defendant did not have the intent or ability to repay the borrowed money to the victim.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (six months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution, community service, 120 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) The Defendant alleged to the same purport in the lower court’s determination of mistake. However, in light of the fact that the Defendant had no revenue at the time of borrowing money from the victim, and the Defendant appears to have been in a bad credit and bad credit standing, and that the claim for construction payment against a third party was not known at any time, the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion in determining that the Defendant had no intent or ability to repay the borrowed money. 2) The lower court’s findings of fact and determination as above are closely examined in comparison with the record, and the lower court’s determination and determination as above were examined. In this regard, even if the Defendant borrowed money from the victim for the purpose of paying the rent for buildings, taxes, credit card use, etc., but the Defendant made a false statement with regard to the place of use as “the money or construction cost to be paid to the customer,” during the third trial of the lower court, the Defendant stated that “the construction cost was used as notified to the victim, but it was not used for another reason.” However, the Defendant asserted that he did not grant the Defendant’s “the construction cost to be paid.”