The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant had an intention or ability to repay 20 million won from the injured party at the time of borrowing from the injured party.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (an amount of KRW 1.5 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination as to the assertion of mistake of facts in borrowing money from another person: (a) in the event that the other party did not respond to the request of the other party as to the method of raising funds to repay the borrowed money, the crime of fraud is established; and (b) in light of the above legal principles, the following facts or circumstances acknowledged by the court below by comprehensively taking into account the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., ① in the course of operating a coffee shop, the defendant sold 40% of the shares held by the defendant to the victim while operating a coffee shop in the Philippines, and operated a coffee shop with the victim on January 1, 2014, the defendant opened the coffee shop to the victim "a coffee" only on the ground that there was financial capability at the time (see Supreme Court Decision 2003Do5382, Sept. 15, 2005).

10 million won shall be put in the head office.

Only one month shall be used and repaid immediately.

“The purport of “” refers to “the purchase of a vehicle,” which was paid KRW 20 million by the injured party on February 5, 2014, on the page 52 through 53, page 207 through 208 of the evidence record, and ② However, the Defendant used the vehicle to purchase the vehicle for the purpose of borrowing the victim’s talking about KRW 20 million.

In addition, it was argued that most of the actual consumption of these cost of living was 8 to 89 of the evidence evidence record, and 3) the defendant did not open a coffee shop in Mana (the defendant was to make an investigation agency itself for open by itself as a local member of the Philippines.

The victim stated) and (4).