The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

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

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Error of mistake 1) The Defendant is the Defendant, ① Company D (hereinafter “victim Company”).

2) On August 2016, the time when the victim company received the first equipment and materials from the victim company, the Defendant Company C (hereinafter “C”) was operated by the Defendant Company C (hereinafter “C”).

(2) At the time of the instant case, C did not have any intent or ability to pay the price normally, even if it was supplied by the victim company with the electric equipment and materials from the victim company, and it did not have any intent or ability to pay the price. Furthermore, at the time of the instant case, C received an electrical construction from G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”) and received a subcontract from the victim company for the electrical construction work at each construction site (hereinafter “supply”) and received the supply of the electric equipment and materials necessary for the construction from the victim company (hereinafter “instant supply”), and thereafter, it was impossible to pay the price of the instant electric equipment and materials because it was impossible to receive the subcontract payment due to the aggravation of the financial situation of G, etc., which is the main contractor, and it did not have any intent or ability to pay the price at the time of the instant supply.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Comprehensively taking into account the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant could sufficiently recognize the fact that the Defendant, even if he was supplied with the electric equipment from the victim company, by deceiving E, the representative of the victim company, and received the electric equipment, as stated in the facts charged, even if he was unable to pay the price normally.

Furthermore, in light of the following facts and circumstances, the criminal intent of defraudation of the defendant is also recognized.