The judgment of the court below and the judgment of the court below are all reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three years and six months.

In this case.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal

A. On April 6, 2007, the judgment of the court of first instance is erroneous as to the victim M. (1) 1 billion won for the victim M. (1 billion won for the purchase of a multi-level financial product by K. The above money is merely an investment in K Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “K”), not a borrowed money, and the defendant did not deceiving the victim M. as stated in the facts charged in the instant case.

Even if it falls under the borrowed money, the Defendant did not actually operate K, so the lender who borrowed the above KRW 1 billion is a person who actually operated V or K, who is the legal representative of K.

A statement made by the defendant to the purport that the defendant is the actual manager of K or L Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “L”) to the investigation agency is not admissible or reliable, and the victim M's statement to the purport that it conforms to the facts charged in the instant case is

B) On May 3, 2007, the building leased KRW 100 million to the victim M was owned by the victim M as well as the office of L operated by V, and the tenant under the above lease agreement is the victim M. Therefore, the defendant is irrelevant to the above lease agreement, and the defendant did not deceiving M. as stated in the facts charged in the above lease agreement. Furthermore, the victim M acquired the claim for refund of deposit amount of KRW 100 million under the above lease agreement under the name of the lessee, and was actually returned part of the lease deposit after the lease. Accordingly, the crime of fraud is not established. (c) Since the victim M acquired the claim for refund of deposit amount of KRW 100 million under the above lease agreement under the name of the lessee, and was actually returned a part of the lease deposit thereafter, it is not a crime of fraud. The defendant did not participate in the loan related to the above real estate in X, and the defendant paid money to the victim M and N, and the amount paid by the victim M and N as investment funds to Y.