The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

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

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, as a factual misunderstanding, talks about the purpose of the borrowed money or the repayment method of the debt, etc. to the victim, but at the time, the Defendant had the intent or ability to repay the borrowed money to the victim by holding the claim with the maximum amount of KRW 80,000,000,000, and thus, the Defendant’s deception is not recognized.

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

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of the facts, the crime of fraud, which is a requirement of fraud, should be determined by comprehensively taking into account the objective circumstances such as the defendant's financial power, environment, details of the crime, and the process of transaction before and after the crime unless the defendant makes a confession (see Supreme Court Decision 95Do424, Apr. 25, 1995). In a case where, in borrowing money from another person, if the other party did not respond to the true notification of the method of raising funds to repay the borrowed money, if the other party did not respond to the lending, it is notified of the fact that it goes against the truth as to the method of raising the funds to repay the borrowed money (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200Do5382, Sept. 15, 2005). According to evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the crime of fraud is established in the case where the defendant knew the victim of the apartment house, such as the establishment of the defendant's ownership in the name of the defendant, etc.