The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant had the ability to repay and intent to repay the bill at the time when the Defendant received the bill from the victim, and was trying to pay the discount of the bill after checking the bad credit standing, such as the possibility of default on the bill, etc. Therefore, the Defendant did not have the criminal intent of defraudation.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty, which is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts.

2. The judgment of the court below denied the charges as alleged in the grounds for appeal, and the court below ruled that the defendant had the criminal intent to acquire the defendant at the time of this case, comprehensively taking account of the circumstances such as the time of original adjudication which was duly adopted and investigated by the court below.

Considering the evidence shown in the records of this case and the above judgment of the court below closely, the above judgment of the court below is justified, and there is no error of law of misunderstanding of facts.

Ultimately, the defendant's above assertion cannot be accepted.

(3) The court below held that the defendant did not pay the discounted amount of the bill because the bill received from the victim is likely to be in default. However, the defendant did not keep the money in preparation for the default of the bill after he received the discounted amount of the bill at a discount from another person, but did not keep the money in preparation for the default of the bill. The defendant paid only part of the money to the victim and used the remaining money in repayment of personal debts, this argument cannot be accepted).