The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The defendant had no intention to acquire money by deceiving victims.

B. It cannot be viewed as a false transfer because there was an agreement on the transfer of property by D Company Mro, Inc.

2. The determination of fraud is based on the following: (a) insofar as the Defendant does not make a confession, the crime of defraudation, which is a constituent element of fraud, is bound to be determined by taking into account the objective circumstances such as the Defendant’s financial history before and after the crime; (b) the background and details of the crime; and (c) the process of performing transaction (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do11718, Apr. 9, 2009). The court below duly adopted and investigated evidence: (i) the Defendant, at the time of the instant case, was in excess of the obligation, such as the amount of loans worth 2 billion won; (ii) the Defendant was awarded a contract with the Central Engineering Co., Ltd. for construction work of KRW 1.82 billion from 209 to 201; and (iii) the Defendant received discount from the Central Engineering Engineering Co., Ltd. to pay the price of the bill at a discount of KRW 200,000 to his customer; and (iv) the Defendant received discount from the above Engineering Q Q from 201 to 3.