The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Of the facts charged in this case, the part of KRW 12 million which the Defendant acquired by deception from the victim F is not a crime of fraud against the victim F because the Defendant borrowed money from G. However, the lower court convicted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

B. The sentencing of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances, which were duly adopted and examined by the lower court in determining the assertion of mistake of facts, i.e., (i) the victim F borrowed money from G by lending money to investigative agencies and the Defendant at the lower court court court, and (ii) when lending money to the Defendant, G directly deposited money from its account to the Defendant’s account.

According to G’s copy of the passbook, the Defendant’s statement is consistent with the victim F’s statement because it is possible to verify the details transferred from G’s account to the Defendant’s account on March 28, 2013, and it corresponds to the victim F’s statement. ③ In the investigative agency and the lower court’s court’s statement to the effect that he/she borrowed money from the victim F, the Defendant can fully recognize the fact that he/she acquired 12 million won from the victim F without his/her intent or ability to repay as stated in the lower judgment. Therefore, this part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

B. It is recognized that the instant crime of determining the illegality of sentencing ought to consider equity with the case where the judgment is to be rendered simultaneously in accordance with Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act in relation to the crime of fraud for which the judgment has become final and conclusive and the concurrent crimes of a group after Article 37 of the Criminal Act

However, it is not good that the crime of this case is committed, that the defendant repeats the crime of fraud against many victims, that most of the damage has not been recovered up to the depth of the party, and that the age, sex, and environment of the defendant are the age, sex, and environment.