The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the above punishment for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. Reasons for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant did not borrow money from the victim, but instead received the money from the victim himself/herself in return for internal relations. Therefore, the Defendant did not defraud the money by deceiving the victim.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s judgment as to the assertion of mistake of facts and the evidence duly adopted and investigated at the trial court and the trial court: (i) the Defendant prepared a monetary consumption loan agreement with the victim upon receiving monetary payment from the victim; (ii) there is no other evidence to deem that the said monetary consumption loan agreement was merely a mere formally prepared tax data on the source of business funds while the victim forged or damaged the Defendant donated the funds for golf practice course business to the Defendant; and (iii) the Defendant continued to receive approximately KRW 1,90,000 won per month upon entering into an internal relationship with the victim and continued to receive payment for the cost of living; and (iii) the said monetary consumption loan agreement includes the contents of the right to operate golf practice course and the right to provide the money as security; and (iv) the Defendant still received money from the victim’s partner with the right to withdraw from the golf practice and the right to receive money from the said business loan without the consent of the victim; and (v) the Defendant still received money from the said partner.