The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that, in relation to the sale of vehicle fuel saving devices, the Defendant only completed the explanation to the victims in accordance with the application for the establishment and the contract, and did not conclude that the sales proceeds are settled by points generated by one month, if the victims have paid an amount of KRW 100,000 per month. Therefore, a deception against the victims cannot be established.

2. The deception as a requirement for fraud is sufficient if it is related to all active and passive acts that have to abide by each other in property transactions, and that are the basis of judgment in order to allow an actor to engage in an act of disposal of property that he/she wishes to act by mistake.

Therefore, where it is deemed that the other party to a transaction would not engage in the transaction if the other party to the transaction would have been notified of certain circumstances, a person who receives property through such transaction is obligated to notify the other party of such circumstances in advance in accordance with the principle

Nevertheless, it constitutes a crime of fraud by deceiving the other party by implied disregarding the fact that the notice has not been given.

Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, ① the defendant was engaged in the business of selling vehicle fuel reduction devices and black boxes while working in C, ② the defendant visited the victims' work company, etc. while engaging in the sales business and explained the efficacy of the fuel reduction device for the vehicle to the victims, and when purchasing black boxes together, used the purchase and explained that the purchase price would be set off by one hundred thousand won per month, and thus, it would not actually be paid if the purchase price would be set off by points that occur in the month. ③ The defendant is harsh to this explanation.