The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the fact that the defrauded obtained one million won from the injured party on February 11, 2013 among the facts charged in the instant case by mistake of fact, the above one million won was paid to E rather than the Defendant, and thus, in relation thereto, the Defendant is not legally liable.

B. Of the sentencing division, the sentence of the lower court (1.5 million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Summary of the facts charged in this case

A. On February 10, 2013, the Defendant: (a) informed the victim B of the road in front of the Seoul Cheongyang-ri Station; and (b) accessed the way on the road in front of the Seoul Cheongyang-ri Station; and (c) obtained money from the victimized person; and (d) moved money to the original city with

Defendant 1 made a false statement to the victim on the roads near the Sang-si University located in the Sinju-si of the above day, stating that “I would immediately repay the money to the victim, because I would urgently lend the money.”

However, in fact, the defendant did not have any particular income and did not have any intent or ability to repay the money even if he borrowed the money from the injured party because he did not have any money.

On February 11, 2013, the Defendant was issued one million won around February 11, 201 to the injured party under the pretext of borrowing money.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

B. On February 20, 2013, the Defendant made a false statement by phone call to the victim B at a not more than Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter referred to as “Around February 2013, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “A loan of KRW 350,000 to require the payment of money, with interest added up to the loan of KRW 2 million prior to the transfer of money.”

However, in fact, the defendant did not have any particular income and there is no money available to him, and even if he borrowed money from the damaged person, he did not have any intention or ability to repay the money.

The Defendant was transferred 350,000 won on February 21, 2013 from the victim as the borrowed money.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

3. Determination

A. Defendant’s assertion and judgment of the lower court (i.e., the Defendant).