The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the fraud among the facts charged in the instant case, the Defendant had the intent to obtain fraud while submitting an electronic tax invoice to the Daegu Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim Financial Institution”) and applying for a loan of corporate purchase funds, or had any deceptive act.

shall not be deemed to exist.

However, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination as to the assertion of mistake of facts is 1) The deception, which is a requirement for fraud of relevant legal principles, refers to all affirmative or passive acts that widely observe each other in the transactional relationship with property, and it does not necessarily require false indication as to the important part of the juristic act, and it is sufficient to establish facts that form the basis for judgment in order to enable the other party to perform the act of disposal of the property that the other party wishes to dispose of. Thus, in a case where it is recognized that the other party to the transaction would have not been engaged in the transaction if he was notified of a certain circumstance, it would induce the other party to commit fraud (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2003Do7828, Apr. 9, 2004; 2005Do574, Oct. 28, 2005). In order to determine the crime of deception, which is a subjective constituent element of fraud, the subjective constituent element of fraud, such as mistake before and after the crime was committed, the environment of the other party, details of the transaction, and objective circumstances leading to 2054.