The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles 1) Part of fraud (criminal facts in the judgment of the lower court No. 2013Kadan2148) is a victim F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim Co., Ltd”).

A) It is true that the Defendant submitted a false customer list to the victim company and borrowed money from the victim company. The Defendant and the victim company agreed that “the Defendant shall purchase customer information data purchased from the victim company by borrowing money from the victim company and then sell it again to the seller and pay the Defendant the Defendant’s existing obligation to the victim company with the fees received.” However, the important matters in the agreement are not whether the customer in the customer list actually subscribed to the pertinent product, but whether the customer is the actual customer number, that is, the Defendant’s business performance, and whether the fees were actually paid. Therefore, even if the Defendant borrowed money to the victim company after confirming that the number of the customers kept by the Defendant was the fact, there is no causal relationship between the Defendant’s deception and the disposition of the victim company, and the Defendant did not have any criminal intent to commit fraud. Of the judgment below, the portion of violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act by submitting the false list of total tax invoices by seller (Article 2014Da1777(2) of the Act on the Punishment of Tax Evaders, 2584, the Defendant and the Internet user information provided by seller.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, fraud 1.