The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant had no intention to acquire the instant money from the victim of the fact, and the amount of money that the Defendant borrowed from the actual victim is different from the amount of damage indicated in the facts charged.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court acknowledged the following facts based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court as to the assertion of facts: (a) the Defendant: (i) was in an investigative agency; (ii) was in a continuous monetary transaction relationship with the victim; (iii) was in existence with the victim by November 3, 2012; and (iv) demanded to lend KRW 3,250,000 to the victim around November 3, 2012; and (iii) was paid KRW 2,475,000 after deducting the above KRW 5,2550,000 from the victim; and (iv) the Defendant loaned additional KRW 32,00,000 to the victim around November 14, 2012; and (iii) was paid KRW 32 million from the victim by the investigative agency until February 23, 2013 (including investigation records; and (v) the Defendant received KRW 167,600,000,00 from the victim; and (iii) the Defendant was not paid the amount of KRW 32.66 million.

“The fact that the Defendant stated as “” (in the investigation record, 66 pages) and ③ the sum of the principal and interest of each borrowed instrument as of May 15, 2013 and June 4, 2013, as of June 4, 2013, stated as “the sum of the principal and interest of each borrowed instrument” = 66,30,000 won ( = 25,550,750,000 won) as of June 4, 2013, “4,000 won” as of June 4, 2013.